MASTER 

NO.  93-81635-3 


MICROFILMED  1993 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the 
"Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 


The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or 
other  reproductions  of  copyrighted  material. 

Under  certain  conditions  specified  in  the  law,  libraries  and 
archives  are  authorized  to  furnish  a  photocopy  or  other 
reproduction.  One  of  these  specified  conditions  is  that  the 
photocopy  or  other  reproduction  is  not  to  be  *'used  for  any 
purpose  other  than  private  study,  scholarship,  or 
research.*'  If  a  user  maizes  a  request  for,  or  later  uses,  a 
photocopy  or  reproduction  for  purposes  in  excess  of  *'fair 
'  that  user  may  be  liable  for  copyright  infringement. 


use, 


This  institution  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to  accept  a 
copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


A  UTHOR: 


GLADSTONE,  WILLIA 
EWART 


TITLE: 


THE  BATTLE  OF  THE 


PLACE: 


CINCINNATI 

DA  TE: 

1875 


^; 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 

BIBLIOGRAPHIC  MICROFORM  TARHFT 


Master  Negative  # 


936 
C154 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  - 


6589 


Campbell,  Alexander,  1788-1866. 

The  ^tattle  of  the  giants |  a  debate  on  the 
Roman  Catholic  religion,  held  in  Cincinnati, 
between  the  late  Alexander  Cair^bell  •••  and 
the  Right  Rev.  John  B.  Pur  cell;  together  with 
the  Vatican  decrees  in  their  bearing  on  civil 
allegiance,  by  the  Right  Hon.  W.  E.  Gladstone 
...  with  the  replies  of  Dr.  Newman,  Archbishop 
Manning,  the  Right  Rev.  Monsignor  Capel,  Lord 
Acton,  and  Lord  Camoys,  and  a  full  abstract 
of  Gladstone's  rejoinder.  Cincinnati,  C.  F. 


^^Mll^ 


(Continued  on  next  card) 


936 
C154 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


Bibliographic  Record 


Campbell,  Alexander,  1788-1866.   The  battle  of 
the  giants  ...  1875.   (Card  E) 


Vent;  Chicago,  J.  S.  Goodman  &  oo.,  1875. 
viii,  9-360,  247  p.   ISf^. 

"The  battle  of  the  giants;  the  Vatican  de- 
crees in  their  bearing  on  civil  allegiance,  by 
the  Right  Hon.  W.  E.  Gladstone  ..."  has  spe- 
cial t.-p.  and  separate  paging. 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 


S^^fpf^ 


FILM    SIZE: 

IMAGE  PLACEMENT:   lAr  EA^  IB    IIB 

DATE     FILMED;  1  -3  - >  ^    INITIALS 

HLMEDBY:   RESEARCH  PI  TBI  JrATlOMg  jf^c  WnnnRiri^^;^- 


REDUCTION    RATIO:       /^<^ 


Sf^.J^^ 


c 


Aasociatioii  for  Information  and  Imago  Managomont 

1100  Wayne  Avenue,  Suite  1100^ 
Silver  Spring.  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 


1         2        3        4        5        6        7 

1 1 1  iitiiminiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilinilniilmiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiii 


^ 


Inches 


1 


T 


I 


m 


1 1  I  I    1 1 


8        9       10       11       12       13      14 

uJuuluuliiUiljii^^ 


15   mm 


m 


TTT 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


1*5 

16.3 


13.2 

i 
ii 


3.6 


14.0 


Ift 


1.4 


25 
2.2 

2.0 


1.8 


1.6 


TTT 


MflNUFfiCTURED  TO  fillM  STflNDflRDS 
BY  RPPLIED  IMRGE,    INC. 


<i> 


of.^ 


I-/ 


C/ifq- 


intlifCttpoflrtDllork 


LIBRARY 


PURCHASED  FROM 

THE 

WILLIAM  C.  SCHERMERHORN 
MEMORIAL  FUND 


i 


. 


I 


i  ^  7  ^ 


iXlEi 


BATTLE  OF  THE  GIANTS: 

ON  THE 

ROMAK   CATHOLIC  RELIGION, 

HELD   IN 

CINCINNATI, 

BETWEEN 

THE  LATE  ALEXANDER   CAMPBELL, 

Founder  of  the  *' Christian"  Church, 
AND 

THE  RIGHT  REV.  JOHN    B.   PURCELL; 

TOGETHER  WITH 

THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE, 

BY  THE 

RIGHT  HON.  W.  E.  GLADSTONE,  M.  P. 

WITH  THE 

REPLIES    OF     DR.    NEWMAN,    ARCHBISHOP   MANNING, 

THE  RIGHT   REV.  MONSIGNOR  CAPEL,  LORD 

ACTON,  AND   LORD   CAMOYS, 

AND  A  FULL  ABSTRACT    OF 

eLADSTONE'S  KEJOINDER. 


CLNCINI^JATI. 

\C!.'-F.  'Y.EKT..'  ,     .■'    . 

S      GOODMAN    &    CO.,    CHICAGO, 
'  '  ,  .1875'.:,"'  ;.: 


*     •      •      •!  I 


*  >    »   . 


i 


i.i'>C 


I 


THE 


\ 


BATTLE  OF  THE  aiANTS: 

ON   THE 

EOMAl^J-   CATHOLIC  RELIGION, 

HELD   IN 

CINCINNATI, 

BETWEEN 

THE  LATE  ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL. 

Founder  of  the  *'C/iristian"  Churchy 
AND 

THE  RIGHT  REV.  JOHN   B.   PURCELL; 

TOGETHER   WITH 

THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE, 

BY  THE 

RIGHT  HON.  W.  E.  GLADSTONE,  M.  P. 

WITH  THE 

REPLIES    OF     DR.    NEWMAN,    ARCHBISHOP   MANNING, 

THE  RIGHT   REV.  MONSIGNOR  CAPEL,  LORD 

ACTON,  AND   LORD   CAMOYS, 

AND  A  FULL  ABSTRACT    OF 

GLADSTONE'S  REJOINDER 


Gi.N<;i:N^A.T.|.r;  :   /. 

S      GOODMAN    &    CO.,    CHICAGO. 


•I  «  • •  • 


•  t 


•  •  • « 


•  •  •  « 


*    • 


•  •-  • 


*    • 


*  • 


X 'T!^/'"' 


I 


^^C 

C/5'f- 


fZJ     "■"    •'i,  43-   / 


We  the  nndewigned.  havings  sold  and  conveyed  to  J.  A.  James  and  Co..  of 
Cincinnati,  for  a  certain  sum  par  copy,  (to  be  pid  by  them  to  us,  or  to  our  or 
der,  and  to  be  appropriated  to  two  public  charitable  imtitutiona,  as  arreed  on 
between  our9erve8,^  for  all  that  shall  be  printed;  the  exclusive  right  of  printing 
and publuhin-  the  DEBATEon  the  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  RELIGION;held  in 
th^  Sycamore  Street  Meeting  House,  Cincinnati,  from  the  13th  to  the  21st.  of 
January  1837,  inclusive,  between  ourselves,  and  taken  down  by  Reporters,  em- 
ployed Ly  the  said  J.  A.  James  &  Co.,  and  revised,  corrected,  and  approved  by 
m,  do  hereby  make  known  that  the  edition  or  editions  published  by  j!  A.  Jarae. 
&  t.o.,  or  by  their  authority,  and  revised  by  us,  must  be  considered  the  only  cor- 
rect and  authorized  editions  of  said  DEBATE, 

CiNCMSNATi,  Feb.  1st.  1837.  f  JOHN  B.  PURCELL, 

Bp.  Cin, 
A.  CAMPBEU^ 


n 


TO  THE  PUBLIC. 


The  Publishers  being  well  aware  of  the  importance  of  obtain- 
ing a  full  and  correct  report  of  this  discussion,  have  spared  no 
pains  nor  expense  to  effect  this  object. 

They  employed  two  gentlemen  well  qualified  as  reporters. 

From  the  joint  notes  of  these,  they  furnished  each  of  the 
parties  with  a  copy  of  his  part  of  the  report  for  revision,  with 
the  express  understanding,  that  nothing  should  be  added  or  sub- 
tracted to  make  theif  speeches  different  from  what  they  were 
when  originally  delivered. 

AAer  being  put  in  type,  a  proof  sheet  of  all  was  sent  to 
each,  for  his  last  corrections. 

Believing,  that  by  this  mean?,  the  desideratum  sought,  has 
been  obtained,  this  work,  is  now  commended  to  an  enquiring, 
intelligent,  and  reading  community. 

THE  PUBLISHERS. 

Cincinnati,  Fsb,  1837. 


•11   -t 


\ 


m  *  # 


INTRODUCTION 


To  introduce  the  following  report  to  the  reader,  we  lay  he* 
foie  him  the  correspondence  of  the  parties,  which  immediately 
preceded  the  debate. 

LETTER  FROM  MR.  CAMPBELL. 

CiKciirirATi,  Jait.  lltb,  1837. 
Bishop  Purcell-^Respecttd  Sirs 

At  two  o'clock  this  morning,  afler  a  tedious  and  perilous  journey  of 
ten  days,  I  safely  arrived  in  this  city.  The  river  having  become  innaviga- 
ble in  consequence  of  the  ice,  I  was  compelled  to  leave  it  and  take  to  tho 
woods,  about  two  hundred  miles  above.  By  a  zigzag  course  which  car- 
ried me  to  Chillicothe  and  Columbus,  sometimes  on  foot,  sometimes  on  • 
aleigh,  and  finally  by  the  mail  stage,  I  accomplished  a  land  tour  of  two 
hundred  and  forty  miles,  equal  to  the  whole  distance  from  Wheeling  to 
Cincinnati. 

After  this  my  travel's  history,  I  proceed  to  state,  that  it  was  with  pleas- 
ure  I  received  either  from  you  or  some  of  my  friends,  a  copy  of  the  Daily 
Gaxette,  on  the  22d  ult.  intimating  your  fixed  purpose  of  meeting  me  in  a 
public  discussion  of  ray  propositions,  or  of  the  points  at  issue  between  Ro- 
man Catholics  and  Protestants.  This,  together  with  your  former  declara- 
tions in  favor  of  full  and  free  discussion,  is  not  only  in  good  keeping  with 
the  spirit  of  the  age,  and  the  genius  of  our  institutions,  but  fully  indicative 
of  a  becoming  confidence  and  sincerity  in  your  own  cause.  This  frank  and 
manly  course,  permit  me  to  add,  greatly  heightens  my  esteem  for  you. 

Now,  sir,  that  I  am  on  the  premises,  I  take  the  earliest  opportunity  of 
informing  you  of  my  arrival,  and  of  requesting  you  to  name  the  time  and 
place  in  which  it  may  be  most  convenient  for  you  to  meet  me  for  the  pur- 
pose of  arranging  the  preliminaries.  It  has  occurred  to  me,  that  it  would 
be  useful  and  commendable  to  have  an  authentic  copy  of  our  discussion, 
signed  by  our  own  hands,  and  published  with  our  consent  •-  and  that  is 
might  have  all  the  authority  and  credit  which  we  could  give  it,  it  would  b« 
a2  ▼ 


nfTEODWCTIOII. 

a|Mdi«iil  to  tell  to  ■mne  of  iIm  piibltshera  in  thb  citj,  tlie  eopjriglit,  and 
let  tiieiii  emploj  a  atooofrapliar  or  atenographera  to  report  faithfully  ths 
whole  matter. 

It  will  alao  aecore  for  aach  a  work  a  more  exteniive  reading,  and  coneo* 
quentlj  a  wider  range  of  usefulness,  and  I  have  no  doubt,  be  most  accep- 
table to  oor  feeEngs.  and  every  way  reputable,  to  devote  the  profits,  or  tha 
proceed*  of  the  copyright,  to  some  benevolent  institution,  on  which  we 
may  both  agree ;  or  in  case  of  a  difference  on  a  fitting  institution,  that  wa 
aelect  each  an  object  to  which  we  can  moat  conscientiously  assign  all  tha 
pwili  of  aach  publication. 

In  Mikr  to  these  ends,  it  will  be  necessary,  that  we  timously  arrange  all 
the  piellminaries,  and  as  many  persona  are  now  in  waiting,  I  trust  it  may 
be  every  way  practicable,  during  the  day,  to  come  to  a  full  understanding 
on  the  whole  premises. 

Yeiy  feapectfally. 

Your  ob*t.  serv't 

A.  CAMPBBI«Iia 


BISHOP  PURCELL'S  REPLY. 

CmciirHATi,  11th  Jivitaiit,  1837. 

Ji*.  Jilexander  CbnififteA— J%  Dear  Sir  9 

I  sincerely  sympathise  with  you  on  the  tediouanesa  and  perils  of  your 
joitrney,from  Bethany  to  Cincinnati  This  is  truly  a  dreadful  time  to 
embark  on  our  river,  or  to  traverse  our  atate.  The  sun's  bright  face  I 
have  not  seen  lor  several  days ;  I  hope  whmi  the  forth-coming  discussioa 
Is  once  finished,  our  minds,  like  his  orb,  will  be  less  dimmed  by  the  clouda, 
and  radiate  tha  light  and  vital  wanalh  without  which  thia  worhl  would  ha 


If  it  neat  your  convenience,  I  shall  ha  happy  to  meet  yon,  at  any  tinM 
in  Hm  BOfiiing,  or  in  the  afternoon,  at  Ilia  Atheneum. 

Yoor  proposition  respecting  the  aale  of  an  authentic  copy  of  the  discus* 
aioii  to  a  pnbliaher,  and  the  proeeeda,  all  expenaea  deducted,  applied  to  tha 
baaaiil  of  some  charitable  institution,  or  inatitatioiia,  meeta  my  hearty  eon- 
currenea.  And  I  pto^iaat  that  one  half  iha  availa  of  aala  be  given  to  tha 
•*  Cincinnati  Orpiiaa  Asylum,"  and  the  other  half  to  tha  •«  81.  Peter's  fe- 
male Orphan  Asylum,**  comer  of  Third  and  Plum  streets,  Cincinnati. 

With  best  wishes  for  your  eternal  welfare,  and  that  of  all  those  who  siir 
caicly  seek  for  the  truth  aa  it  is  in  Christ  Jesua,  I  remain 

Vary  reapectfully  yoara, 

t  JOHN  B.  PURCELL, 

Bishop  of  Cincinnati. 


INTRODUCTION. 


¥11 


Th«  parties  met  in  the  Athenaeum  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  of  Jan. 
lUh.,  when  after  some  debate  on  the  question,  IVho  8haU  Oi 
the  reaponderU  ?  they  finally  agreed  to  the  following     . 

RULES  OF  DISCUSSION. 

1.  Wo  agree  that  the  copy-right  of  the  discussion  shall  be  sold  to  some 
bookseller,  who  shall  have  it  token  down  by  a  stenographer,  and  that  all  the 
avails  of  the  copyright  shaU  be  equally  divided  between  two  such  public 
charities  as  Bishop  Purcell  and  Mr.  Campbell  shall  respectively  designate. 

2.  That  the  discussion  shall  take  place  in  the  Sycamore-street  meeting 
bouse ;  ami  k  aliall  continue  seven  days,  exclusive  of  Sunday,  commencing 
lo^ay,  (Friday,  13th)  from  half  past  9  o'clock,  A.  M.  to  half  past  12,  and 

from  3  to  6  P.  M.,  each  day. 

3.  Mr.  Campbell  shall  open  the  discusiiion  each  session,  and  Bishop  Pur- 
cell respond.  During  the  morning  sesRion  the  first  speech  of  each  shall  not 
exceed  an  hour,  nor  the  second  half  an  hour.  In  the  afternoon  each  speaker 
ahaH  occupy  only  half  an  hour. 

4.  This  discussion  shall  be  under  the  direction  of  a  board  of  five  modera- 
tors; of  whom  each  party  shall  choose  two,  and  these  a  fifth:  any  three  of 
whom  shall  constitute  a  quorum. 

6.  The  duties  of  the  moderators  shall  be  to  preserve  order  in  the  assem« 

Uv.  and  to  keep  the  parties  to  the  question. 

^'       ^       ^  ^  ^  JOHN  B.  PURCELL, 

A.  CAMPBELL. 

In  order  to  meet,  as  far  as  possible,  the  arrangements  entered 
into  for  conducting  the  contemplated  debate  for  seven  days,  Mr. 
Campbell,  according  to  agreement,  sent  to  bishop  Purcell,  on 
Thursday  morning,  Jan.  12,  the  following  statement  of  the 

POINTS  AT  ISSUE. 

1.  The  Roman  Catholic  Institution,  sometimes  called  the  <Holy,  Apoa- 
tohc,  Catholic,  Church,'  is  not  now,  nor  was  she  ever,  catholic,  apostolic, 
•r  holy ;  but.  b  a  tec/  jn  the  &ir  import  of  that  word,  older  than  any  other 
■eci  now  existing,  not  the  *  Mother  aad  Mistress  of  all  Churches,'  but  an 
apostacy  from  the  only  true,  holy,  apostolic,  and  catholic  church  of  Christ" 

2.  Her  notion  of  apostolic  succession  is  without  any  foundation  in  the 
'  Bible,  in  reason,  or  in  foot ;  an  imposition  of  the  most  injurious  consequences, 

built  upon  unscriptural  and  anti-scriptural  traditions,  resting  wholly  upon  the 
opinions  of  interested  and  fallible  men. 

3.  She  is  not  uniform  in  her  faith,  or  united  in  her  members;  but  muta- 
ble and  fallible,  v  any  other  sect  of  philosophy  or  religion — Jewish,  Turk- 


¥111 


INTRODUCTION. 


isli,  or  Cliriatian— a  confederation  of  aects  with  a  politico-ecclesiastic 
liead 

4.  She  is  the  "Babylon"  of  John,  the  "Man  of  sin  of  Paul,  and  the 
Empire  of  the  "Youngest  Horn"  of  Daniel's  Sea  Monster. 

5.  Her  notions  of  purgatory,  indulgences,  auricular  confession,  remission 
of  «nfl,  transubstantiation,  supererogation,  &&,  essential  elements  of  her  sjs- 
Imii,  are  immoral  in  their  tendency,  and  injurious  to  the  well-being  of  sod- 
•ly,  religious  and  political  ^ 

0.  Notwithstanding  her  pretensions  to  have  given  ns  the  Bible,  and  faith  in 
it,  we  are  perfectly  independent  of  her  for  our  knowledge  of  that  book,  and 
its  evidences  of  a  divine  original. 

7.  The  Roman  Catholic  religion,  if  infallible  and  unsusceptible  of  reforma- 
tion, as  alleged,  is  eaaentiallj  anti-American,  being  opposed  to  the  genius  of 
aE  free  institutions,  and  positively  subversive  of  them,  opponing  the  general 
leading  of  the  scriptures,  and  the  dilfusioa  of  useful  knowledge  among 
the  whole  community,  so  essential  to  liberty  and  the  permanency  of  gocil 

fovenunent* 

A.  CAAIPBELI^ 
CiacixvATii  ISth  January,  16S7. 


DEBATE 


OS  THB 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC  RELIGION. 


REPORT. 


-. ,.  .  „^t  Mcordinff  to  appointment,  on  the  13th  Janiiary,  1837,  at  the 

SyTll^oTeTtJer  Meat^^H^^^^^  past  nine  o'clock,  A.  M. 

MODERATORS. 

Messrs.  Samuhl  Lewis,  Thomas  J.  Biggs,  Wiluam  Disnet.  Johi.  Rc 

AKRS  AND  J.  W.  Piatt. 

WILLIAM  DISNEY  CHAIRMAN. 

ajf.  Q«m«pl  f^wi»  havinr  called  the  meeting  to  order,  read  the  rules  of  tha 
nilie  r^Led  uJ;>n  bSleen  the  parties,  and  the  proposit.on.  advanced  by 
Debate,  as^reea  upon  oei  requested  the  audience  to   rtfram  from  any 

J^ibi:7,'f  Lf^ptTa^ ^^^^^  "Lp'robation  a,  it  would  interrupt  the  debate. 
Mr.  Campbell  then  opened  the  debate  as  follows  :— 

My  Chrigtian  Friends  and  Fellow-CUizen*-' 

I  appear  hefore  you  at  this  time,  hy  the  |ood  providence  of  ora 
Heavenly  Father,  in  defence  of  the  truth,  and  in  explanation  of  the 
grearrXmi?^, 'regenerating  and  ennohling  principles  of  Prot^«tan^ 
fsm,  as  opposed  to  the  claims  and  pretensions  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
church.  I  come  not  here  to  advocate  the  particular  tenete  of  any 
secCbit  to  defend  the  great  cardinal  principles  of  P'^^^f.^^t^^"!-     ^„ 

Considerable  pains  appear  to  have  been  taken  by  the  gentleman 
whoTs  my  opponent  on  this  occasion,  to  impress  upon  the  minds  of 
Ilie  public  the  idea  that  he  stands  here  in  the  attitude  of  a  defender 
of  Catholicism,  and  to  represent  me  as  its  assailant.  I  am  sorry  to 
say  that  even  some  Protestants  have  contributed  to  give  f^^Usolor  to 
Jhfs  debate ;  for  I  saw  in  this  morning's  Gazette  an  ^^J^le,  m^*^^^^^ 
I  am  represented  as  conducting  a  crusade  against  the  Ro'^f .  .fatho- 
lies?  Ite  editor  appears  to  have  his  sympathies  f  ^^^»/ly  f  ^^^^^^'^ 
thdr  cause.     He  Uvery  sympathetic  indeed,  m  behalf  c»f  the  Roman 

Catholic  religion.     Eviry  aaony  the  7^>^«\<^^,;»;tu^ofU^^^ 
to  him;  for  every  groan  she  heaves  he  has  a  bottle  full  of  tears  readjr 
to  blpoured  ou^  ^I  will  not  Stop  to  enquire  whether  thev  are  polm- 
cal  or  religious  tears.    I  have  to  do  with  the  worthy  gentleman  here. 
Who  hrs  represented  me  as  having  volunteered  to  come  forward  with 

'^"l^rJ  sTr^eW^^f^l'"^^^^^^^^        of  my  audience,  who  were  pre- 

seltT^hHa'tteeting  of  th^  College  of  'i;eacjiers  m^^^^^ 

•)  far  from  its  being  true  that  I  made  an  attack  in  the  first ^nstance, 


10  DEBATB  ON  THB  , 

■iMMi  the  Roman  Calliollc  cliiifcli,  the  gentlemaii  did  firet  asf ail  t]i« 
Prfitestants. 

Me  says  in  theGazeUeof  the  19th  of  Dec.  1830,  that  I  am  a  bold  and 
wanton  challenger;  but  a  word  of  comment  on  this  document  will 
•liew  ^at  it  is  quite  the  other  way. 

The  issue  was  made  in  the  first  instance  in  the  College  of  Teach- 
ers. You  will  recollect  that  when  Dr.  J.  L.  Wilson  read  an  oration 
on  tbe  subject  of  unirersal  educntion,  the  gentleman  arose,  and  in  that 
Fioteatant  house,  and  before  a  Protestant  assembly,  directly  and  pos- 
itively ])rote8ted  a^^inst  allowing  the  book  which  Protestants  claim 
to  contain  their  religion,  to  be  used  in  schools.  He  uttered  a  tirade 
ifiinst  the  Protestant  modes  of  teaching,  and  against  the  Protestant 
iniuence  upon  the  community.  This  was  the  origin  of  the  dispute^ 
Had  it  not  been  for  the  assertions  made  by  the  gentleman  on  that  oc« 
casion,  we  should  not  have  heard  one  word  of  a  discussion. 

It  is  true  that  the  propositions  just  read  may  present  me  in  the  at 
titude  of  what  he  is  pleased  to  call  an  assailant  of  the  Roman  church. 
But  the  question  is — how  has  the  controTersy  originated  ?  And  let 
me  ask,  how  is  it  possible  for  the  gentleman  to  prove  that,  because, 
a  ,e«  ago,  I  made  aome  answer  to  an  attack  on  Proteatantism  from 
the  state  of  Illinois,  and  called  for  some  more  reputable  antagonist, 
that  on  this  account  he  did  not  assail  Protestantism,  and  that  I  am 
the  assailant  in  this  case!  Does  my  having  been  plaintiff  in  that 
case  make  me  necessarily  plaintiff  in  every  other  case  t  Does  my 
having  told  him  that  I  stooo  prepared  to  discuss  the  question  at  largo 
with  any  creditable  gentleman— [Here  Mr.  G.  was  interrupted  by  the 
moderators  as  not  speaking  to  the  point]  I  submit  to  the  decision 
of  the  moderators.  I  thought  it  due  to  myself,  that  the  public  should 
.know  precisely  the  attitude  in  which  the  gentleman  and  myself  stand 
in  tUB  matter.  I  stand  here  as  the  defender  of  Protestantism,  and 
not  as  the  assailant  of  Catholicism.  I  wished  to  exonerate  myself 
from  such  an  imputation.  But  as  the  gentlemen  have  decided  that 
we  proceed  at  once  to  the  question,  let  us  begin  and  examine  the  &rst 
proposition.    It  ii  as  follows : 

**  Pmop.  I.    The  Roman  Catbolic  Inititution,  tomettmet  eailed  the  *  Holy, 

Apostolic, Catholic.  Church,*  is  not  now,  norwtt she  ever,  catholic. apottolic,  or 
holy  ;  but  is  efeef  in  the  fiiir  import  of  that  word,  older  tbanafly  other  lect  now 
eziatiiir*  not  the  *  Mother  and  Mittrega  of  ail  Charches/  but  an  apottacy  fniai 
tka  oa^  true,  holj,apoatoUc,  and  catholic  charch  of  Christ." 

As  this  is  the  place  and  time  for  logie  rather  than  rhetoric,  I  wili 
pioeeed  to  define  the  meaning  of  tlw  important  terms  contained  ia 
tliit  propoaition.  The  inbject  ia  tlia  Roman  Catholie  Institution. 
Tlda  inttitntlon,  notwitlittanding  its  large  pretenaiona,  1  affirm,  can 
lie  profed  clearly  to  be  •  acfl,  in  the  true  and  proper  imnort  of  the 
term.  Though  ale  call  herself  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches, 
iha  is,  striiSlT  speaking,  a  sect,  and  m  more  ikmm  m  tetL  We  now 
fnfom  lo  adduce  proof  to  auatain  this  part  of  the  proposition. 

In  the  first  place,  the  i^  term  Roman  Catholie  mdicates  that  sh« 
is  a  sect,  and  not  the  ancient,  nniveraal  and  apostolic  church,  the  mo- 
ther and  mistress  of  all  churches.  If  she  be  the  only  universal  or 
Catholic  church,  why  prefix  the  epithet  Roman  ?  A  Roman  Catholic 
church  is  a  contradiction.  The  word  Catholic  means  universal — ^the 
wont  Jioinan  means  a—jtliimg  local  and  particular.    What  sense  or 


SOMAN  CATHOLIC   EBLIGIOK. 


11 


^.,  IS  there  ^ -  FJ^-^- ^^^^^^  tUtn'J^'^^'aS 

another  account.  J^tris^^^^on^  ^i  „X^^  and  in  all  times,  why 

'^Th^lrf  C^nt^  C^  Catholic  church  of  Amert 

call  herself  RomanTio  say  pj^ji^^n^ia  church  of  Cincinnato, 
ca,  IS  just  a«  «*>«"^f  *?  KurX-the^hurch  of  France  of  the 
F^^d'^Stat'.  ^'T^L'^e^J^^s  A^^  chooses  indicates  that  sue 

■"  T^e^titJ  ctec  historians  endeavor  to  reconcile  this  jTisi^ 
pa2?;ffrrs  b^  saying  that,  though  those  particular  -ou^^f^onn 

"But  in  antiqu  ty  no  more  was  intended  by  the  name  oi  vwc  y  .^\^cTto 

tf«fie  ch««2orthe  city  of  ^'«'«- ''^.^XS^  ^ftZllV^R^  T^' 
«on,  or  .apencnptioM.  look  •>">?'?  «»«J«  ^''j'^,  „^«  of  tb.  church  of 
Gnek  «:hi.m.tic.  Kern  to  ^e  »he  fi"t  who  Mve  toej»M.e^  „f  u,„to.li.. 

Konie  to  .11  the  churche.  of  the  ""V^^'i'^j'^if X"h  of  Rome,  from  th. 
tinguid.  the  churchM  whwh  ""™""'"*'^  "i\^**F„^?h°,  c^  the  custom 
Sli:  7t"Zr.  •?rtu^h™f'^:m^ToTe'c,th5  J"h„rch^    But  the  other 

only  unsctiptural,  but  dishonorable ;  as  opprobnous  as  erer  were  the 

•TtS- we'^Ter-CathoHc".  alone;  -1^- ^^-^.^ 
end^Tor  to  impress  the  ide»  that  she  is  no  longer  to  be  <^^^'^ 
maTcatfiolic,'*  but  Catholic,  this  term  e<,nally  proves  her  a  sect;  f« 
?J^e  New  Testament  and  primitive  antJquity  there  is  no  such  de- 
^nation     It  U^py  the  church  of  ChSst,    It  is  one  th.ng  for  us 

K^J:-.  IZefro^rseWeVr'^  "">*"  ^^re^'J^Wet'r^cS 

Ln.:ruisSh^i^f.^H^rii^^^ 

ana  is,  ^^^  /JJ^  *^''\  .1^  bestow  it,  for  she  is  not  catholic.  But, 
it:  and  we  dare  not, in  truui,  oesww  iv» »"»  wj»^  ,      name 

M  there  is  no  church  known  in  the  New  Testament  by  that  name, 
i*miia  we  BO  designate  her,  still  she  would  be  a  sect. 

lltZ^  2k  what  is  the  church  of  Rome  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tn^  or  rShe?  what  is  t^  present  Roman  Catholic  mstituUon! 
Pe^irmfhere  tTsay.  most  emphatically,  that  I  have  not  the  slight- 

e'luisp^^^^^^^^ 

or  of  the  worthy  gentleman  who  is  opposed  to  me  in  this  deoaie.  1 
do  not  wish  or  intend  to  use  the  slightest  expression  wh  ch  could  be 
c^nsl^Uito  Mn  unfriendly  tone  ofsatire,  irony  or  invective  towards 


13 


1IB14m  0!f   TfTV 


'I 
t' 

1J 


w 


tliB  feapeettble  grentleman,  or  towards  his  chtirvli.  I  shall  speak 
fireoly  of  her  pretensions  to  he  thd  only  true  church,  &c.  but  1  shall 
ohsenre  a  scrupulous  respect  in  all  my  lan^a^  towards  the  present 
iejifetint»tivefl  of  the  CatlioHc  church  in  the  nineteenth  century. 

Are  wo  then  to  understand  her  as  the  immutable,  universal,  ancient 
primiiive,  apostolic  church  of  Christ!  Are  we  to  understand  this  bj 
the  Roinmn  Catholic  church  of  the  nineteenth  century,  with  her  popes 
her  cardinal  her  patriarchs,  primates,  metropolitans,  archbishops, 
archdeacons,  monks,  friars,  nuns,&c.  &c.  teachmg  and  preachin|v  tho 
use  and  worship  of  images,  relics,  penances,  invocation  of  departed 
men  and  women,  veneration  for  some  beingf  whom  they  call  "  the  moi 
ther  of  God,"  teachinor  and  preachinor  the  doctrine  of  priestly  absola 
tion,  auricular  confession,  purgatory rtransubstantiation,  extreme  unc 
tion,  &c.  &c. 

Is  tliis  the  ancient,  universal,  holy  apostolic  church  !  Not  one  of 
these  dogmas  can  be  found  in  the  bible. 

They  ori^ntted  hundreds  of  years  since,  as  I  am  prepared  to  show, 
from  the  evidence  of  Roman  Catholic  authors  themselves.  How  thei 
ean  we  call  it  the  ancient  apostolic  church  I  Not  one  of  these  offices 
nor  dogmas  is  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament.  Hear  Du  Pin  on 
this  point  In  exposing  the  imposition,  practised,  by  an  effort,  so 
late  as  the  ninth  century,  to  foist  into  the  history  of  the  church  certain 
pfetonded  decrees  or  writingjs  of  those  called  the  first  popes,  Du  Pin, 
an  anthentio  Roman  Catholic  historian,  proves  these  decrees  and 
writings  to  be  spurioas,  because  in  them  there  are  numerous  allusions 
to  offices  and  customs  not  yet  existing  in  the  times  referred  to. 

*•  The  foUowliig  proves  them  spurious.  Ist.  The  second  epistle  of  St.  Clement 
directed  to  St.  James,  speftlts  of  the  Ottiarii  or  doorkee{>ers,  irchdeacons  and 
other  ecxlesiastical  officers,  that  were  not  then  iotrodiiccd  into  the  church.'* 

2nd.  **  Thb  letter  mentiom  fu^-deacons,  an  order  not  then  ealabiislied  in  the 
church."    p.  S84. 

3d.  '*  In  the  first  Epistle  attributed  to  St.  Stxtm,  he  it  called  an  *  archbishop,' 
a  word  not  used  in  this  time." 

4th.  "The  second,  attributed  to  the  same  pope, mentians  consecrated  vessels, 
and  appeals  to  RomCt  the  grandeur  of  the  church.  It  is  there  pretended  that  all 
bishofia  wait  for  the  pope^s  decision,  and  are  inatracted  by  his  letters ;  modes 
of  ipeakli^  never  used  b^  the  first  bishops  of  Rome." 

Sih.  **Tiie  epistle  attributed  to  Tehtphoru*  calls  him  an  archbishop,  a  naoM 
unknown  in  the  first  ages." 

fith.  ••  There  is  a  decree  in  it,  to  enjoin  three  masses  on  our  Savior^s  nathritj, 
A  custom  not  so  andent" 

f th.  "  We  find  several  paanfes  in  the  letter  attributed  to  Ameebu,  which 
mm  not  agree  with  the  time  of  that  pope  ;  as,  for  instance,  what  is  there  laid 
down  concerning  the  onflnoftotu  ofbhhopt,  iaeerdotal  tmtmre,  arcklfi*hop$  and 
pfifitafef ,  which  were  not  instituted  till  long  after  ;  besides  many  things  of  the 
same  nature."    p.  585. 

How,  then,  can  we  suppose  that  this  ehoroh  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, with  so  mMy  appendages,  is  the  apostolic  church— the  only 
©liginal,  primitive, universal  institution  of  Christ! 

But  she  glories  in  the  name  of  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches 
throughout  the  world.  This  astonishes  me  still  more ;  for  with  the 
bible  in  his  hand  and  history  before  him,  wha  can  stand  up  and  say, 
that  this  church  ever  was  the  mother,  and  mistress  of  all  churches  ! 

The  most  ancient  catholic  church  was  the  Hebrew.  She  was  the 
toother,  though  not  the  mistrm  of  all  churches;  for  the  christian 
church  has  no  reigning  queen  on  earth,  to  lord  it  over  her— as  Paul 
nays,  on  another  occasion— "  Jerusalem  is  the  mother  of  us  all." 


KOMAN   OATHOUC    RELIGION. 


m 


If  the  irentleman  admit  Luke  to  be  a  faithful  historian,  he  must  not 
J^nfafeX  Hebrew  church  first,  but  the  Samantan,  Phemcian, 
SvLn  and  Hellenist  churches  as  older  than  the  church  m  Rom^^ 
aavTwe  speak  of  churches,  as  respects  antiquity,  the  Hebrew,  Sa^ 
mJriterSvnan  and  Phenician  churches  must  be  regarded  as  pnor  to 
Tr?   llie  Acte  of  the  AposUes  close  with  Paul's  first  appearance  in 

^  «lft  that  the  Roman  Catholic  institution  may  stind  before  you  in 
bold  reUef  t  f  rc^ari^n  establishment,  I  will  give  you  a  defimUo^ 
oHic    prete^^^^^^^^^^  an  authentic  source,  one  of  her  <>wn  s^n- 

Sards  The  Douay  catechism,  in  answer  to  the  question— "  What 
i^the  essLntlarptJts  of  the  church  1"  teaches  "  A  pope,  or  supreme 

^^thrrn^aTeTe  trlt^^^^^^^  --"net^^TwIlt 

Sse^d^SrCv  t?^^^^^^^ 

ToSd  wV4e  away  any  one  of  these,  she  1?«««^  1^^^^^^^^^ 

ceases  to  be  what  she  assumes.    My  f  «t!  w.'^  w^tLut  suc^ 
tK«t  for  hundreds  of  years  after  Christ,  she  was  without  sucn  a  neaa , 
hfmtt  i^^^^^^  of  these  elements ;  and  consequently,  this  be- 

.  ng  TsenUal  tS  her  existence,  she  was  not  from  the  begmmna  Be- 
^Le  no  body  can  exist  before  its  he^.  Now,  if  we  can  finda  ume 
when  there  was  no  pope,  or  supreme  head,  we  find  a  time  when  there 

was  no  Roman  Catholic  party.  oi^Mpaiastical  re- 

Bvreferrine  to  the  scriptures,  and  to  the  early  ecclesiastical  re- 
corZ  we  can^asily  settle  this  point.  Let  us  begin  with  the  New 
Tes^enrwhich  all  agree,  is  the  only  authenticated  standard  of 
fe^K  mannerL^the  only  inspired  record  of  the  christian  doctrine. 
tZ  ^  a^ardinal  point,  and  I  ^  thankful  that  in  this  we  all  agree. 
wLVnoTfound'^the^,  wants  the  evident  -n-f^VoUX'^Tk 
and  can  never  command  the  respect  and  homage  of  those  who  sect 
for  divine  authority  in  faith  and  morality.  ,  j   „„  v^ 

I  iffim  then,  thit  not  one  of  the  offices,  I  have  ^nu^iej^^.^f^  ^ 
longing  to  the  Roman  Catholic  church  was   known  in  the  days  of 
Se  apSstles,  or  is  found  in  the  New  Testament.    On  the  f mitraiy. 
Se  very  notion  of  a  vicar  of  Christ,  of  a  prince  of  the  apostles,  or  of 
a  unlv7rsal  head,  and  government  in  the  cfhristian  church  is  repugnant 
toX  genius  and  spirft  of  the  religion,    We  shall  ^^^^^^^^^ 
ges  of  scripture.  frSm  the  Roman  version,  to  prove  that  the je^^dea 
ff  aa  earthly  head  is  unscriptural  ^^d.anti-scnpturaL    Th^^^^ 
from  which  I  am  about  to  quote  was  printed  m  New  York,  and  is  <»r 
tified  to  correspond  exactly,  with  the  Rhemish  ^.^^^J?!^^/ *^^?^^^ 
of  gentlemen,  of  the  first  standing  in  society.    If  ^t  ^iffersfrom  any 
othlr  and  more  authentic  copy,  I  wiU  not  rely  upon  it.   l^^^'^ 
to  take  whatever  bible  the  gentleman  may  propose.    ^^^1^^°"^^^^ 
twentieth  of  Matthew.    «  fesus  said  to  his  disciples,  You  knowj^at 
Zprinces  of  the  Gentiles  overrule  them,  and  those  that  are  the  grea- 
tor  e^xercise  power  against  them.    It  shall  not  be  so  a^o«g  J^"^^^^^^^ 
whosoever  will  be  the  greater  among  you, let  him  be  your  minister. 
Does  this  convey  the  idea  of  a  prince  among  the  apostles,  a  vic«r  of 
Christ  a  loXoTer  the  people  of  God  1    Does  it  not  rather  say  there 

that  there  shall  not  be  a  pope,  a  s^R^^^^^jt^'VJ^lo  [™ 
Again,  Matt.  23,  8.  **  Be  not  you  called  Rabbi,  for  one  is  your  Master 

B 


14  DBUATB   ON   TUB 

tiid  all  je  are  lircthTen :  and  call  none  father  (i.  e.  pope)  for  one  is 
joir  fattier,  be  that  is  in  heaven.  Neither  he  you  called  masters,  for 
one  is  yonr  master,  Christ.  He  that  is  the  greater  of  yon  shall  be 
your  servitor !"  If  the  very  question  about  a  pope  had  been  before 
ihe  Messiah  at  this  time,  he  could  not  have  spoken  more  clearly. 
This  expression  indicates  the  most  perfect  e<}ua]ity  of  rank  among 
the  apostles  and  disciples  of  Christ,  and  positively  forbids,  in  a  re* 
liirious  sense,  the  assumption  of  the  title  of  father  or  pope.  The  com- 
mandment  which  says  ^^  thou  shalt  not  Bteaf!^*  is  not ^e  clearly  laid 
down  than  the  command  **  call  no  man  father." 

Now  will  the  gentleman  deny  that  "  pope*'  (in  Greek  "  pappas," 
in  Latin,  '*papa*')  means  "  father  1"  ana  that  the  case  clearly  comes 
within  the  command.  Jesus  Christ  says,  "  call  no  man  pope  ;**  yet 
they  ordain  a  bishop  and  Call  him  pope ;  and  this  pope  claims  the 
title  of  *♦  universal  father" — supreme  head  and  governor  of  tlie  church 
of  Christ.    He  is  sometimes  called  Lord  God  the  pope. 

This  testimony  of  Christ  will  outweigh  volumes.  Put  all  the  fo- 
lios and  authorities,  which  the  gentleman  may  bring,  on  one  side,  and 
this  text  of  Jesus  Christ  on  the  other,  and  the  former,  in  comparison, 
will  be  found  light  as  the  chaff  which  is  blown  away  by  a  breath. 

Can  any  one,  then,  who  fears  God  and  believes  in  the  Messiah,  call 
the  pope,  or  any  human  being  **  father*'  in  the  sense  here  intended. 
The  Ijord  anticipated  the  future  in  all  his  precepts,  and  spoke  with 
an  eye  to  it  as  well  as  to  the  men  of  hit  own  time.  He  had  the  pride 
and  assumptions,  of  the  Rabbis  of  Jerusalem,  in  his  eye,  who  cove- 
ted lemown,  who  loved  such  greetings  in  the  market  place,  and  re- 
eelved  such  compellations  in  the  8ynaj|rogues.  Describing  these  men 
to  his  disciples,  lie  cautions  them  against  their  example,  and  teaches 
them  to  regard  each  other  as  brethren.  I  hope  the  gentleman  will  pay 
farticular  attention  to  this  point  in  his  reply  to  these  remarks. 

The  third  testimony  on  which  we  rely  will  be  found  in  Ephesians 
iv.  11.  This  passage  sums  up  all  the  officers  or  gifts  which  Jesus 
gave  the  church  after  his  ascension  into  heaven.  *«  And  **  says  Paul 
*'  he  gave  some  apostles,  and  some  prophets^  and  some  evangelists, 
and  some  pastors,  and  doctors "  or  teachers.  In  this  enumeratidn, 
which  contains  the  whole,  there  is  no  pope.  The  highest  or  first  rank 
Is  ffiven  to  apostles. 

In  every  other  enumeration  found  in  the  epistles,  there  is  the  same 
dear  reference  to  the  apostles  as  thefint  class.  1  Cor.  xii.  28.  But 
let  Peter  himself  speak  as  to  his  raiut.  We  see  that  in  his  own  Itt 
Epistle,  ch.  1,  he  calls  himself  an  apoitle,  not  ihe  apoetle  of  Jesus, 
not  the  prinee  of  apostles,  not  the  supreme  head  of  the  chmch.  Pe- 
ter had  no  idea  of  such  headship  and  lordship. 

Again  in  addressing  the  ^'senion**  or  elders,  chap.  v.  1.  he  says, 
"  1  myself  am  a  fellow  senior.'*  They  were  all  co-elders,  co-bishops, 
eo-apoetles,  as  respected  each  other ;  and  as  respected  all  other  offi- 
cers the  apostles  were  jfrsl.  The  thought  of  a  supreme  head  among»t 
them  is  not  found  in  the  New  Testament;  only  as  reprobated  by  our 
Savior. 

I  will  not,  at  present,  advance  any  more  scriptural  authority  upon 
the  point,  but  shall  proceed  to  examine  what  foundation  this  element 
of  the  Roman  church,  has  in  ancient  history.  But  I  would  here  say 
distinctly,  once  for  all,  that  I  will  not  open  a  single  document  to  prove 
'Say  doctrine,  tenet,  or  principle  of  Protestantism,  otlier  than  this  holy 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


15 


record  of  the  prophets,  and  apostles,  the  holy  men  of  God,  whospake 
aTthey  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  On  these  1  rely,  and  1  a^ 
firm  that  these  contain  no  authority  for  the  assumption  of  the  doctrine 
of  a  universal  father,  pope,  or  head  of  the  church.  Fhere  was  no 
such  person  mentioned— no  such  idea  cherished  until  hundreds  of 
vears  after  the  death  of  the  apostles.  ,  ,  •  *    • 

1  will  read  the  following  general  remarks  by  this  learned  histonan 
The  tide  page  is  as  follows : — 

A  New  iTistory  of  Ecclesiastical  Writers,  containing  an  account  of 
the  authors  of  the  several  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments ;  of 
the  lives  and  wriUngs  of  the  primitive  Fathers:  an  abridgment  and 
cataloirue  of  their  works;  their  various  editions,  and  censures,  deter- 
mining the  genuine  and  spurious.  Together  with  a  judgment  ujyon 
style  and  doctrine.  Also  a  compendious  history  of  the  Councils ;  with 
Chronoloffical  Tables  of  the  whole,  written  in  French  by  Lewis  El- 
lies  Du  Fin,  doctor  of  the  Sorbonne,  and  Regius  Professor  at  Paris. 
3  vols.  Folio.  The  Third  Edition  corrected,  Dublin,  printed  by  and  ioi 
George  Grierson,  at  the  Two  Bibles  in  Essex  Street,  mdccxxiv. 

I  imi  happy  to  find,  appended  to  the  preface,  the  seals  and  signatures 
of  men  high  in  the  church,  which  I  cannot  now  stop  to  read. 

From  this  work  I  will  proceed  to  read  some  passages  in  proot 
Of  the  proposition  I  have  advanced,  that  there  is  not  a  vestige  of  evi- 
dence  in  favor  of  the  cardinal  idea,  of  the  Roman  Catholic  religion, 
that  there  was  a  pope  in  the  first  ages  of  the  church.  At  the  close  of 
the  third  century  the  highest  advance  yet  made  towards  any  supremacy 
in  the  church  on  the  ground  of  metropoUtan  standing,  is  thus  descnh- 
ed  by  Du  Pin.  .■.•.•  a  • 

-  The  bishops  of  great  cities  had  iheir  prerogative*  in  ordinations,  and  in  coun^ 
ciU:  and  as  in  civil  affairs  men  generally  had  recourse  to  the  civil  metropolis,  so 
likewise  in  ecclesiastical  matters,  they  consulted  with  the  bishop  of  the  metro- 
politancity.  The  churches  of  the  three  principal  cities  of  the  world  were  looked 
iipon  as  chief,  and  their  bishops  attributed  great  prerogatives  to  themselves.  Ths 
church  qf  Rome,  founded  by  St  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  was  considered  as  first, 
and  its  bishou  as  first  amongst  all  the  bishops  of  the  world  ;  yet  they  did  not  be- 
lieve him  to  be  infallible:  and  though  they  frequently  consulted  him,  and  hit 
advice  was  of  great  consequence,  yet  they  did  not  receive  it  blind-fold  and  im- 
plicitly.  every  bishop  imagining  himself  to  have  aright  to  judge  in  ecclesiastical 

Observe  the  bishops  of  the  principal  cities  attributed  to  themsehm 
greai  prerogatives.  And  Rome,  the  chief  city,  began  to  assume  the 
chief  prerogatives.  But  the  general  character  of  the  clergy  as  detail- 
ed by  this  writer  waa  not  yet  &vorable  to  such  assumpUons-^or, 

"  The  clergj  were  not  distinguished  fi-ora  others  by  any  peculiar  habits,  but 
by  the  sanctity  of  their  life  and  manners,  they  were  removed  from  all  kind  ot 
avarice,  and  carefully  avoided  every  thing  that  seemed  to  carry  the  appearanc« 
of  tcandaloas,  filthy  lucre.  They  administered  the  sacrament  g-ra/«,  ami  believed 
il  to  be  an  abominable  crime  togive  or  receive  any  thing  for  a  spiritual  blessinar. 
Tithe*  were  not  then  appropriated  to  them,  but  the  people  maintained  them  vol- 
ontanly  at  their  own  expense."  .  u,„flk;-  Tk-» 

"  The  clergy  were  prohibited  to  meddle  with  any  civil  and  secular  aflain.  Tbey 
wer«  ordained  against  their  will  and  did  not  remove  from  one  church  to  another 
out  of  a  principle  of  interest  or  ambition.  They  were  extremely  chaste  and  re- 
gular.    It  was  lawful  for  priests  to  keep  the  wives  they  married  before  they  were 

ordained.**  .       .     ,  . ,.  »  .  a   •     — 

Nothin<y  indeed  like  an  ecclesiastical  establishment  was  yet  in  ex- 
istence :  for  says  Du  Pin,  speaking  of  these  times, 

After  all,  it  must  be  confessed,  that  the  discipline  ot  the  church  has  been  •• 


-'.1 


16 


DSBATK   ON   TU'E 


i 


titrewclf  diiereiit  »md  m  often  »It«ml,  that  it  ii  almost  lmpo!!i;b!e  to  say  aii| 
thiiijr  poMtivel¥  concerning  it."  p.  590.  ^ 

So  Stood  the  matter  at  the  close  of  the  third  century. 

But  we  have  still  more  definite  and  positive  testimony,  in  the  great 
councils  of  the  4th  and  6th  centuries.  Let  us  then  examine  the  early 
councas.  The  famous  council  of  Nice  which  sat  in  325,  is  the  first 
general  council  that  ever  assembled ;  for  although  they  call  the  con- 
Mltations  of  the  apostles — ^Acts  15.,  a  council,  yet  in  the  enumeration 
iif  feneial  councils,  of  which  they  establish  eighteen,  that  of  Nice  it 
called  the  first 

At  this  council  there  were  present  318  bishops.  It  was  called  by 
the  Roman  emperor  in  order  to  settle  certain  discords  in  what  was 
them  called  the  church.  By  the  sixth  canon  of  this  first  council  it  ap- 
iMtro,  aocoiding  to  Du  Pin,  that  the  idea  of  a  pope,  or  supreme  head, 
liad  not  bmn  to  be  entertained.    The  sixth  canon  of  tlie  council  of 

Nice  is  as  rollowt. 

•*  The  64h  canon  it  fanioat  for  the  lereral  questions  it  has  occasioned.  Tb*i 
most  natural  sense  that  can  be  given  to  it,  is  this:  *  We  ordain  that  the  ancient 
custom  shall  be  obaerved,  which  gives  power  to  the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  over 
all  the  provinces  of  EgypU  Idbm^  and  Pantapolia,  because  the  bishop  of  Rome 
has  the  like  jurisdiction  over  all  the  tuburbicarv  regions  (for  this  addition  must 
be  supplied  ont  q(  RuAnm;)  we  would  liliewise  have  the  rights  and  privileges  oi 
tbecMrch  of  .^iiltocA  and  the  other  churches  preserved  ^  but  these  rights  ought 
not  to  prejudice  those  of  the  metropolitans.  Ir  anv  one  is  ordained  without  thf 
COBMiit  of  the  netropolitan,  the  council  declares,  tnat  he  is  no  bishop:  but  if  an| 
one  it  canonically  choeeo  oy  thesufirage  of  almoatall  the  bishop  of  the  province 
and  if  there  are  but  one  or  two  of  a  contrary  opinion,  the  suftrages  of  th«  h» 
greater  number  ought  to  caify  it  for  the  ordinattoo  of  those  particular  persons 
Thii  canon  bein-^  thus  explained  has  no  difficulty  in  it  It  doea  not  oppose  tbt 
primacy  of  the  church  of  Rome,  but  neither  does  it  establish  it* 

*«  In  this  iCBse  it  is,  that  it  compares  the  church  of  Rome  to  the  church  oi 
J||MmJr<«,  by  considering  them  all  as  patriarchal  churches.  It  continues  also 
to  the  church  of  Antimh  and  all  the  other  great  churches,  whatsoever  right* 
they  could  have;  but  lest  their  authority  should  be  prejudicial  to  the  ordinary 
metropolitans,  who  wer«  subject  to  their  jurisdiction,  the  council  confinns  what 
had  been  ordained  in  the  fourth  canon  concerning  the  authority  of  metropo- 
litans in  the  ordination  of  bishops.  This  explication  is  easy  and  natural,  and  we 
have  given  vmny  proofs  of  it  in  our  Latin  disiertation  concerning  the  ancient 
dtsciwine  of  the  cnnrcb." 

**This  canon,"  says  Du  Pin,  who  be  It  remembered  was  alwayi 
tnxious  to  find  some  authority  for  the  pope's  supremacy,  "  does  not 

■ST4SLISH  THE    SUPASMAC¥  QW  THE  CHURCH  OF  RoME."      Willing  SS 

he  was  to  have  this  primacy  traced  to  the  beginning  of  Christianity, 
h®  is  constrained  to  admit,  that  even  the  council  of  Nice  does  not  es- 
tablish it  Nay  more — it  is  in  truth  against  it ;  for  it  gives  the  Bishop 
of  Alexandria  like  jurisdiction  with  the  church  of  Rome;  and  also 
preserves  to  the  church  of  Antioch  its  metropolitan  dominion. 

It  would  be  too  tedious  to  go  into  an  exposition  of  the  causes,  why 
■o  much  power  was  accumnlatod  in  the  hands  of  four  or  five  bishops. 
It  originated  in  the  divisions  of  the  empire.  In  Roman  iurisdiction, 
there  were  four  great  political  dioceses,  (for  Mocae  was  then  a  politi* 
eal  term)  and  to  these  the  church  conformed.  Hence  the  patriarchal 
sees  of  Rome,  Constantinople,  Antioch,  and  Alexandria.  In  process 
of  time,  Jerusalem  was  added,  and  these  all  became  radiating  centres 
of  ecclesiastical  jpower  and  patronage.  The  bishop  of  each  diocese 
assumed  a  sort  ot  primary,  in  his  own  district ;  and  as  various  inter- 
ISnrences  and  rivalries  in  jurisdiction  occurred,  the  council  of  Nice  so 
far  decided  that  the  same  power  should  be  given  to  them  all — ^that  all 


SOMAYi    CATHOLIC    REMOION. 


17 


primates  should  be  coordinate.  Hence  Du  Pin  could  not  find  m  that 
council  authority  for  the  supreme  primacy  of  Rome.  In  the  canons 
of  the  second  and  third  general  councils  tliere  is  no  reference  to  these 

matters  whatever.  .,    ^  rti.  i    j         r 

I  shall  therefore  proceed  to  the  great  council  of  Chalcedon,  of  pre- 
eminent authority,  the  greatest  of  the  first  four  general  councils. 

From  all  the  canons  of  the  council  relating  to  government,  it  is  cvi 
dent  that  they  had  not  yet  excogitated  the  idea  of  a  supreme  head. 
Says  Du  Pin,  ,  ^     ^     .     ,     .... 

"The 28th  canon  grants t3  the  church  of  the  city  of  Coiutenftftopw,  whicn  •• 
called  JVew  Rome,  the  same  privileges  with  old  Rome,  because  thb  city  isthe  ■* - 
cond  city  in  the  world.  It  also  adjudges  to  it,  besides  this, jurisdiction  over  tba 
dioceses' of  Ponius.AMia,  and  TAmcc,  and  over  the  churches  which  are  out  of  the 
bounds  of  the  emperor,  and  aright  to  ordain  metropolitans  in  the  provwces  ot 
these  dioceses."  p.  678.  i_i.        •     .t 

Thus  this  council,  composed  of  340  bishops,  and  assembling  m  the 
year  of  our  Lord  451,  gave  the  same  power  to  the  patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople as  to  the  patriarch  of  Rome,  and  makes  the  supremacy  of 
the  one  equal  to  the  supremacy  of  the  other. 

I  have  examined  the  proceedings  of  all  the  councils  of  the  first  six 
centuries,  of  which  I  find  about  170,  promulgating  in  all  about  1400 
canons.  I  have  read  and  examined  the  twenty  creeds  of  the  fourth 
century  witli  all  their  emendations  down  to  the  close  of  the  sixth ; 
and  I  affirm,  without  the  fear  of  contradiction,  that  there  is  not  in  all 
these  a  single  vestige  of  the  existence  of  a  pope  or  universal  head  of 
the  church  down  to  the  time  of  Gregory  the  great,  or  John  the  Faster 
of  Constantinople. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  show  from  the  same  learned  historian  when 
this  idea  began  to  be  divulged.  And  be  it  emphatically  observed  that 
the  title  of  pope  in  its  peculiar  and  exclusive  sense  was  first  assumed 
by  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and  approved  by  the  patriarch  of 
Rome.  Du  Pin  says  in  his  life  of  Gregory,  chap.  1,  *'  He  did  of- 
ten rigorously  oppose  the  title  of  universal  patriarch,  which  the  patri- 
archs of  Constantinople  assumed  to  themselves."  Indeed  he  calls 
the  title,  "  proud,  blasphemous,  anti-christian,  diabolical,"  and  says, 
the  bishops  of  Rome  refused  to  take  this  title  upon  them  »*  lest  they 
should  seem  to  encroach  upon  the  rights  of  other  bishops."  But  the 
following  document  or  remonstrance  against  the  title  shews  what  a 
novelty  Sie  idea  of  an  universal  head,  father,  or  pope  was  even  at 

Rome,  A.  D.  588 : — 

•♦  St.  Gregory  does  not  only  oppose  this  title  in  the  patriarch  of  Conttaniino- 
mU,  but  maintains  also,  that  it  cannot  agree  to  any  other  bishop,  and  that  the 
bishop  of  Rome  neither  ought,  nor  can  assume  it.  John  the  younger,  patriarch 
of  ConstantinwUt  had  taken  upon  him  this  title  in  a  council  held  in  586,  in  the 
time  of  pope  Pelagiua,  which  obliged  tbis  pope  to  annul  the  Acts  of  tbis  coun- 
cil. St.  Gregory  wrote  of  it  also  to  this  patriarch  ;  but  this  made  no  impression 
on  him,  and  John  would  not  abandon  this  fine  title,  B.  4.  Ep.  36.  St.  Gregory 
addressed  himself  to  the  emperor  Mauritius,  and  exbortwi  him  earnestly  to 
employ  his  authority  for  redreseiag  this  abuse,  and  force  him  who  assumed  this 
title  to  quit  it.  He  remonstrates  to  him  in  his  letter,  that  although  Jeans  Chnst 
had  committed  to  St.  Peter  the  care  of  all  his  churches,  yet  he  was  not  called 
univertal  apostU.  That  the  title  of  universal  bishop  is  against  the  rules  of  the 
gospel,  and  the  appointment  of  the  canons:  that  there  cannot  bean  universal 
bishop  but  the  authority  of  all  the  other  will  be  destroyed  or  diminished  ;  that 
if  the  bishop  of  Con»iuntinopU  were  universal  bishop,  and  it  should  happen  that 
he  shonld  fall  into  heresy,  it  might  be  said  that  the  universal  church  was  fallen 
into  dtstrurtiou.    That  "the  council  of  Chalcedon  had  offered  this  title  to  i-^o^ 


mi 


I 


\  i 


BMBATM  OW  TRI 

^iit  nrither  nt.  nor  Hit  loaeaton  would  accept  it,  leit  bj  giffii|^  foniethMif  |i9> 
culiar  to  one  bishop  only,  tli«j  should  take  away  the  i%nts  which  belong:  ta  all 
the  bislio|itd—That  it  beloogt  to  the  emperor  to  reduce  by  hii  authority  him 
who  tiespiaet  the  canons,  and  does  injury  to  the  unifersal  church  by  assuminf 
this  singular  name."     B.  4.  Ep.  33. 

But  It  this  time  the  patriaichs  of  Constantinople  and  Rome  were 
contendingr  for  the  supremaey,  and  while  it  appNsared  to  Gregory  that 
hi«  ri^al  of  the  east  was  likely  to  possess  the  title,  he  saw  in  it,  ere- 
ij  thing  anti-christian  and  profane.  When  a  new  djmasty,  however, 
•''tceml^  the  throne  and  oflered  tl|e  title  to  a  Roman  bishop,  it  lost  all 
ifs  blasphemy  and  impiety,  and  we  find  the  successor  of  Gregory  can 
wear  the  title  of  universal  patriarch  when  tendered  him  by  Phocas* 
without  the  least  scnipulosiiy. 

It  is  then  a  fact  worthy  of  much  consideration  in  this  discussion, 
that  John  bishop  of  Constantinople  first  assiJimed  the  title  of  univer- 
sal head  of  the  whole  christian  cnurch,  and  that  the  bishop  of  Rome 
did  in  that  case  oppose  it  as  anti-scriptoral  and  anti-christian. 

Concerning  the  reputation  of  Saint  Gregory  I  need  not  be  profuse. 
Of  the  Gregories  he  is  deservedly  called  the  Great  Renowned  in 
iisloffy  as  one  who  stamped  his  own  image  on  the  Roman  world  foi 
a  period  of  five  hundred  years,  yet  he  could  not  brook  the  idea  of  a 
pupe,  especially  when  about  to  be  bestowed  on  his  rival  at  Constan 
tinnple. 

St  Gregory,  be  it  remembered,  says  Du  Pin,  did  not  only  oppose 
the  title  in  the  case  of  John  the  Faster,  as  proud,  heretical,  blasphe* 
Moua,  &c.  but  could  not  agree  to  its  being  assumed  by  any  other 
bishop;  he  affirmed  that  the  bishops  of  Rome  ought  not,  dare  not, 
cannot  assume  this  pompous  and  arrogant  title. 

Urns  stood  matters  as  respects  a  supreme  head  up  to  within  14 
years  of  the  close  of  the  6th  century.^[Time  expired.] 


KOMAN   CATHOLIC   MBLIOION, 


10 


Bishop  Puhckli.  rii 


Ekrnn  o'clock  J,  M, 


I  tliought  it  likely,  my  respected  and  beloved  fellow  citizens,  that  I 
ehould  have  to  day  a  difficult  task  before  me.  fiut  I  perceive  that  1 
■hall  have  an  easy  one.  I  expected  from  the  reputation  of  my  antag- 
cmlst  as  a  debater,  that  he  was  going  to  argue  so  closely,  and  to  press 
me  so  hard,  that  he  would,  to  use  a  common  expression,  make  mmced 
meat  of  me,  and  not  leave  oitc  bone  of  me  unbroken.  I  thought  that 
my  cned,  so  ancient,  so  venerable,  so  holy,  was  to  be  torn  into  tat- 
ters and  scattered  to  the  four  winds  of  heaven — I  was  mistaken  ! 

The  gentleman  occupied  ten  minutes  of  his  time  in  endeavoring  to 
bias  the  judgment  of  his  hearers  in  fa?or  of  the  idea,  that  this  contro- 
versy ong[inated  not  with  himself,  but  that  I  was  the  aggressor,  in 
doing  which  ha  was  cilled  to  order.  I  will  not  trespass  more  than 
two  or  three  minutes  on  your  patience  in  answering  his  preliminary 
observations. 

I  am  willing  to  let  that  matter  rest  on  its  own  merits.    As  to  the 

rHion  of  amlant  and  defender  in  this  controversy,  the  public  have 
data,  and  it  is  for  them  to  judge.  My  worthy  opponent  began  the 
present  debate  by  representing  himself  as  the  staunch  defender  of  Pro- 
tesHniism,  endeavoring  thereby  to  enlist  the  sympathies  of  Protestants 
in  his  iivor.    And  what,  I  would  presume  to  inquire,  are  his  princi- 

Klesl    What  are  his  claims,  his  pretensions,  or  his  right  to  appear 
efore  this  assembly  as  the  defender  of  Protestantism  1    We  are  all 


awam  what  sad  pranks  have  been  lately  played  off  before  high  Hea- 
^Mhs  men  styling  themselves  Protestants,  which  all  classes  of  Pro- 
S^tants  unite  in  deprecating,  which  they  all  condemn.  I  know  not 
Whether  thlre  be  not  some  Protestants  here,  who  wi  1  not  admit  his 
*"*  •    e  .u^:,  ^^»»:ni/io wlirt  will  not  believe  thai  the 


8  numerous  and  respectable  class,  wiU  not  consent  to  be  represented 
bf Tm'for  he  denies,  if  I  am  rightly  informed,  that  there  is  propei^ 
l/anTministry  in  the  Protestant  church  «o  called-that  a  dmne  caU 
•Luld  precede  the  assumption  of  the  sacred  office.  [H«'^  ^f,  "J^J" 
emtors  interrupted,  by  requesting  the  speaker  to  confine  himself  to  the 

'^"weU  we  are  so  far  even,  [a  laugh.]  The  gentleman,  then,  began 
bv  the  assertion  that  the  term  Roman  Catholic  was  an  incongruity.— 
rfut  1  deny  it  to  be  an  incongruity.  Terms,  we  ^^11  know,  are  used 
S^e  mo^  clearly  to  designate  the  idea  or  object  which  they  represent. 
" cSic-  is  the  narae^f  our  church;  and  we  only  pre^x  the  word 
Roman  to  signify  that  she  is  in  communion  with  the  see  of  Rome. 
We  acknowledge  there  a  primate  of  superior,  ecclesiastical  junsdic- 
tion,  and  in  his  communion  we  do  abide.  ^„a«^4- 

He  says  the  word  Roman  is  incongruous;  yet  his  own  authonty, 
Du  Pin,  says  it  was  synonymous  with  Catholic.  It  was  so  und^- 
•t^  formerly.  And  here  l  may  observe  that  I  deny  Ae  authonty 
of  Du  Pin  to  be  competent  to  the  settlement  of  questions  to  be  called 
up  for  decision  in  the  course  of  the  present  controversy.  Du  Pm  was 
a*Janseni8t,  removed  from  his  place  of  Regius  Professor  at  the  Sw- 
bonne  for  his  doctrinal  errors,  by  Louis  XIV.  to  whom  Clement  Xl 
addressed  a  brief  on  this  occasion,  commending  his  xeal  for  the 
truth.  The  claim  of  Rome  was  undisputed  m  the  early  ages,  and  it 
was  only  when  her  preeminence  was  contested  that  the  term  Koman 
was  used  before  the  word  Catholic.  Hence  it  was  no  incongruity, 
but  a  clearer  designation  of  the  see  in  whose  communion  were  all  the 
churches.  He  has  stated  an  inaccuracy  in  saying  that  the  word  cath- 
olic was  not  found  in  the  bible.  Is  not  the  epistle  of  St  James  cal- 
led  catholic  1  And  will  he  presume  to  say  the  word  was  not  placed 
there  in  the  very  first  age  of  Christianity  % 

The  gentleman  says  he  will  use  no  words  that  may  convey  an  op- 
probrioSs  meaning.  God  forbid  that  I  should  set  him  the  example. 
1  shall  debate  thfs  question  with  earnestness,  but  not  with  passion. 
As  soon  as  the  discussion  closes,  I  can  meet  the  gentleman  without  a 
aingle  unkind  or  unfriendly  feeling.  n^.x^^w^  ^\,„rr\  T  wmt 

But  in  enumerating  various  doctrines  of  the  Catholic  church,  I  was 
•hoeked  to  hear  him  use  the  language  "  some  being  called  the  mo^cr 
of  God  "  Great  God !  didst  thou  not  send  into  the  world  thy  &on, 
Jesus  Chri8^  to  save  perishing  man,  and  didst  thou  not  select  one 
of  dl  the  daughters  o/Eve,tol)e  the  mother  of  that  child  of  benedic- 
tion,  and  was  not  Mary  this  holy  one,  to  whose  care  was  ccmimitted 
his  nfancy,  and  to  whom  he  was  subject  1  Was  she  not  the  chc^en 
one  of  helven,  to  whom  its  archangel  was  sent  with  the  communica- 
Son-"  Hail,  full  of  Grace,"  or  as  it  is  i^^^e  Protestant  version- 
'*th0Q  that  ;rt  highly  favored-the  Lord  is  with  ^y^''jl^,fl^^ 
BOW  hear  her  stigiSatiied  in  such  language, and  designated  as  "some 
being  called  the  mother  of  God  1" 


The  fNitlemaii  fhen  fsontests  tlie  doctrine  of  ■  hierarcYiy  in  i1m 
diuicli ;  and  says  what  he  asserts  is  proved  by  the  scriptures.  1 
vmld  ask—has  he  read  the  bible  ?  Has  he  read  the  book  of  Levitt* 
em  f  Does  he  not  find  there  the  eiample  set  of  a  distinction  of  orders 
in  religious  affairs  f  Did  not  the  Lord  speak  to  Mosee,  sayin^y^ 
•♦•TliAe  Aaron  with  his  sons,  their  Testments  and  the  oil  of  uncuon,' 
and  he  poured  it  on  Aaron^s  head — ^he  put  also  the  mitre  on  his  head. 
And  amr  he  had  offered  his  sons,  he  vested  them  with  linen  tonics 
■li  firded  them  with  ffirdles,"  Uc.  &c,    "And  Nadab  and  Abiii 


I  consumed  with  ire  for  opposinf  them,  and  thej  died  before  the 
Lord/*    Did  not  Moses  lead i    Did  not  Aaron  assist!    Were  thera 


not  councillors  appointed  by  the  Lord,  to  divide  the  burden  of  thei? 
mioistrv  1  Did  not  king  Josaphat  send  Zachariah  and  Nathaniel  and 
Michael,  and  with  them  the  Levites,  Senneias,  Ice.,  to  teach  the  peo- 
ple? Paralip.  17.  7.  What  is  this  but  a  distinction  of  orders  and  of 
authority  in  the  Jewish  disjpensation  1 

He  says  there  was  no  distinction  of  orders  in  the  early  christian 
ehurch;  and  he  refuted  himself  by  appeiling  for  a  solutipn  of  the  dif- 
leuljjr  to  St.  Paul.  Were  there  no  orders,  no  hierarchy  I  What  says 
St.  ¥wak  in  4th  Ephesians  I  "  And  he  gave  some  apostles,  and  somt 
prophets,  and  other  some  evangelists,  and  other  some  pastors,  and 
teachers,  for  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the  ministryi 
for  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ;  until  we  all  meet  onto  the 
unity  of  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God,  unto  a  perfect 
11HII9  unto  the  measure  of  the  age  of  the  fullness  of  Christ."  Wc 
nipt  here  remark  a  nadation  of  authority  in  the  church  of  God.  Fot 
winti  For  the  work  of  the  ministry.  There  np%'er  has  existed  a  so- 
da! body  without  subordination,  or  distinction  of  *ank.  The  churoh 
of  Christ  is  a  social  body.  It  needs  to  be  subjected  to  order,  even 
more  than  a  political  body;  and  as  if  St  Paul  anticipated  tlie  objeo« 
tion,  which  we  have,  not  without  surprise,  heard  this  day  urged,  ho 
eiprnaaiy  states  the  object  of  the  institution  of  a  hierarchy  by  him, 
wio  Moending  on  high  ^ave  gifls  to  men,  to  be  the  nerfeeting  of  the 
saints— liie  unity  of  faith.  "Are  all,"  he  aslffl,  fwhat  my  friend 
would  make  them)  "  prophets  ?  Are  all  pastors  ?'*— He  elsewhere 
asks,  *'  How  can  they  preach  unless  they  be  sent  1"  By  whom  1  By 
an  ecclesiastical  superior. — So  much  for  the  evidence  of  the  Old  Tes 
tament,  and  the  New  Testament.  They  both  teach  a  head,  a  hierar- 
dlfand  subordination  among  the  people  of  God. 

This  takes  me  to  the  examination  of  the  title,  assumed  by  theCath* 
olic  church,  of  mother  and  mistress  of  all  the  churches.  He  saya 
Jemsaleiii  was  the  mother  church  at  firatF^-nnd  then  the  Samaritan, 
and  so  on,  I  need  not  follow  him.  I  will  eiplain  what  we  mean  by 
tile  tern.— We  call  her  mother  becante  she  gnidea,  tkm  eherishes  ua. 
We  oall  her  mother,  beeanse  we  feel  a  filial  reiverenee  for  her— -just 
aa  an  orphaq  calls  her  who  protects  her,  educates  her,  and  gnides  her 
VBiidering  feet,  by  the  same  tender  appellative.  There  is  no  blasphe- 
my In  this  comparison.  It  is  the  Son  of  God  that  established  the 
aathoritv  of  that  church.    The  name  is  its  designation. 

Bmt  the  word  *  mistress*  is  never  used  in  spring  of  the  chureh, 
in  the  sense  of  lordship,  or  queenship.  It  is  the  way  in  which  chil- 
dren address  their  teacher.  They  frequently  nse  the  expression,  as 
we  read  in  Cordcry's  Colloquies,  "salve  magister."  Ma^islra  here  is 
addressed  to  her  in  her  capacity  of  teacher,  and  such  she  is,  and,  as  I 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    »»LIC10N. 


21 


shall  prove,  by  tlie  appoti.tment  and  the  express  institution  of  Jusua 

Christ.  ■  1     »  i!  • 

He  next  referred  to  the  Doway  catechism  to  show  from  the  defini- 
tion of  the  Catholic  chinch,  that  she  consisted  of  four  elements,  via. 
tlie  pope,  bishops,  pastors,  and  laity. 

Now  the  catechism  of  this  diocese  defines  the  Catholic  church  to 
be  the  congregation  of  all  the  faithful,  professing  the  same  faith,  re- 
ceiving the  same  sacraments,  and  united  under  one  visible  head,  tlie 
pope,  or  vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,  on  earth. 

It  is  defined  to  be  the  congre^tion  of  all  the  fatthfuL  This  is  the 
definition  which  most  authors  give.  It  is  that  of  the  catechism  from 
which  my  friend  has  quoted.  ,         ,        , 

But  let  us  adopt  his  definition,  and  I  am  prepared  to  show  that  the 
idea  of  a  supreme  head  has  its  ori^n  in  the  bible,  and  is  supported 
by  the  eariiest  ecclesiastical  authonty.  I  must  here  take  notice  of  the 
promise  he  gave  to  put  his  finger  on  the  precise  day  and  date  when 
the  church  called  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  ceased  to  be  the  church 
of  Christ.  He  has  left  us  as  much  in  the  dark  as  ever  on  this  most 
important  of  all  events.  It  is  a  point  which  ha&  puzzled  the  worid, 
and  will  for  ever  puzzle  it,  to  fix  that  date.  It  will,  I  am  sure,  puz- 
zle my  friend.  The  whole  worid  has  never  been  able  to  state  at  what 
particular  moment  the  Catholic  church  lost  her  prerogative  and  the 
favor  of  God— when  she  ceased  to  be  in  the  true  sense  the  Calhoiie 
CkureL  Tlie  reason  of  this  is  obvious.  She  has  never  forfeited  her 
prerogative.  But  to  the  matter  before  us.  It  is  opposed  to  scripture 
lo  assert  that  the  church  in  apostolic  days  had  no  head.  What  did 
Christ  say  to  Peter  when  he  addressed  him  the  mysterious  question — 
"  Lovest  thou  me  more  than  these"]  Peter  says  he  does  love  him. 
Jesus  gives  him  the  order, "  feed  my  lambs."  A  second  time  he  asks 
the  question,  and  receives  the  same  reply.  The  third  time  he  repeats 
the  same  question.  Peter,  troubled  that  his  Lord  should  doubt  his 
affection,  replies,  "  Oh  Lord,  thou  knowest  all  things— thou  knowest 
that  I  love  tliee,"  and  Jesus  repeated  the  command — "  feed  my  lambs" 
— "  feed  my  sheep." 

Thus  Christ  establishes  the  headship  of  the  church  in  Peter,  and 
him  he  makes  his  vice-gerent,  or  common  pastor,  to  feed  both  lambs 
and  sheep — both  clergy  and  laity. 

Mr.  Campbell  quarrels  with  the  doctrine  of  the  pope's  headship 
because  it  carries  a  power  and  an  authority  with  it:  and  he  quotes  the 
New  Testament  to  prove  no  such  power  to  have  been  exercised  in  the 
days  of  the  apostles.  I  have  disproved  his  argument  upon  this  point 
already.  Christ  did  institute  a  body  of  leaders,  a  ministry  to  guide 
his  people,  "  that  henceforth  we  be  no  more  children  tossed  to  and  fro, 
snd  carried  about  by  every  wind  of  doctrine,  by  the  wickedness  of 
men,  by  cunning  craftiness,  by  which  they  lie  in  vrait  to  deceive. 
But  doing  the  truth  in  Christ,  we  may  in  all  things  grow  up  in  him 
who  is  head,  even  Christ;  from  whom  the  whole  body  being  compac- 
ted and  fitly  joined  together,  by  what  every  part  supplieth,  according 
to  the  operation  in  the  measure  of  every  part,  maketh  increase  of  the 
body,  unto  the  edifying  of  itself  in  charity."  Must  not  the  body 
have  a  head,  the  house  a  foundation ?  He  objects  that  we  call  the 
sovereign  pontiff— Pope,  or  father,  whereas  Christ  says,  "call  not  any 
man  Father."  But  is  this  prohibition  of  our  Savior  to  be  taken  liier- 
•lly  1    Is  there  any  guilt  or  imoiely  in  calling  a  parect  "  l/atlierl" 


J 


28  DBnATE   Olf  IHB 

Mtny  of  Christ's  commands  are  similar.  He  commands  os  to  call 
no  man  good.-  for  C5od  only  is  good.  But  do  we  not,  in  saluting  • 
friend  in  common  life,  say  "  CJood  Sir,"  "  ray  good  friend !"  &c.  Is 
tlwi®  mm  impiety  in  this  I  It  is  the  using  these  terms  in  that  sense 
ii  which  they  are  peeuMar  to  the  di? inity,  which  Christ  forbids.  And 
ft©  pope  when  he  corresponds  with  the  bishops,  does  not  assume 
these  proud  titles,  but  addresses  them  as  an  elder  Brotheb.  We  do 
Dot  call  him  "  Lord  God  the  Pope." 

Mr.  C.  says,  St.  Paul  did  not  lord  it  over  the  clergy.  Neithei 
does  the  pope.  He  is  to  govern  the  chnrch  aeeording  to  the  eanom. 
Me  cm  make  no  articles  of  faith.  He  cannot,  he  does  not  act  arbi- 
tfurlly  m  proposing  articles  of  belief  unknown  to  Catholic  antiquity. 
But  neither  will  he  suier  innovation.  His  language  is  like  St.  Paul's, 
*'  Were  I  or  an  angel  from  Heaven  to  preach  to  you  any  other  gospel, 
than  what  has  been  preached,  let  him  be  Anathema !"  This  expres- 
sed the  sense  the  great  apostle  entertained  of  his  own  responsibility, 
■Ml  the  danger  of  novelty  in  religion.  He  would  not  suffer  altar  lo 
he  laised  against  altar,  on  the  ground  of  private  interpretation  of  the 
bible.  H©  would  not  suffer  the  wolves  of  heresy  and  error  to  prowl 
around  the  fold,  and  tear,  and  scatter  the  sheep  entrusted  to  him  by 
Jesus  Christ 

It  would  be  horrid  blasphemy  to  apply  to  man  the  title  Father,  in 
the  sense  in  which  it  is  addressed  to  God.  We  never  call  the  pope 
in  any  sense  God.  When  the  pope  writes  to  the  bishops,  he  begins 
by  "  Diieeti  Fratrm"  *'  Beloved  Brethren," — a  republican,  and  if 
you  please  democratic  address.  The  bishops  are  all  brethren  nndci 
one  common  father.  The  pope  is  accused  of  letting  himself  be  woi^ 
shipped.  This  is  not  so.  But  when  the  Pope  comes  before  the  altai 
lie  D0W9  down  like  the  humblest  of  his  people.  "  I  confess,"  says 
he,  "to  Almightjr  God,  to  the  blessed  Virgin  Mary,  the  holy  Apostles, 
and  to  all  the  %ints,"  the  least  of  whom  he  therefore  acknowledges 
to  be  greater  than  himself,  "  that  I  have  sinned ;"  and  this  is  what  is 
called  settinff  himself  up  to  be  a  God !  See  how  you  have  been  de- 
ceived by  the  invidious  representations  you  have  had  of  the  pope,  and 
of  our  doctrine,  my  friends. 

I  assert  again  that  the  authority  nuoted  by  my  friend,  Mr.  C,  viz. 
Bu  Pin,  is  no  authority.  He  was  tne  rank  enemy  of  the  Roman  see, 
a  Jansenist,  reproved  and  censured  by  the  Catholic  chureh.  Mr.  C. 
knows  this,  for  I  have  read  to  him  the  documents  that  prove  it,  and 
he  was  confounded  by  them.  It  is  neither  good  faith,  nor  good  logic, 
to  quote  him  as  an  authority  against  my  argument  As  for  the  signa. 
tures  appended  to  the  Engfis?  translation,!  care  not  for  them ;  Uiey 
may  have  been  wrongfully  placed  there,  or  those  certificates  subom- 
ed.  This  makes  nothing  for  the  authority  of  the  book,  and  no  argu- 
ment can  be  drawn  from  them.  But,  my  friends,  I  am  sure  you  ois- 
ceYeied  his  discomfiture  when  he  appealed  to  Du  Pin.  There  was  a 
stumbling  block  in  his  way,  something  he  could  not  get  over.  Bid 
you  not  notice  how  with  the  rapid  speed  of  a  rail-road  car  dashing 
suddenly  on  an  obstruction,  he  fled  the  track,  when  he  found  to  his  as- 
tonishment that  the  testimony  adduced  by  his  author,  was  not  unfa- 
veiable  to  the  supremacy  of  St  Peter,  and  his  successors !  I  will 
eiamine  his  writings  to  show  that  even  in  the  third  century,  the  bish- 
epB  of  Rome  claimed  this  prerogative,  and  Du  Pin  tells  you  thai  this 
was  acknowledged.      He  says  tticre  were  three  principal  bishops. 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    KKLIOION. 


23 


This  Is  a  great  admission,  and  I  am  thankful  for  it    He  says  that 
even  then,  bishops  came  from  inferior  sees,  and  laid  their  conflicting 
claims  before  the  see  of  Rome ;  and  submitted  to  the  chair  of  Peter, 
doubts  in  religious  matters;  and  ur^ed  it  to  proclaim  a  solution  of 
their  difficulties;  but  he  says,  they  did  not  believe  the  pope  of  Rome 
infallible.    This  is  granting  to  tiie  Catholics  the  whole  mooted  ques- 
tion.    The  question  is  cleariy  settled  by  this  admission.     Appeals 
were  lodged  before  the  bishop  of  Rome,  though  he  was  not  believed 
to  be  infallible.     Neither  is  he  now.    No  enlightened  Catholic  holds 
the  pope's  infallibility  to  be  an  article  of  faith.    I  do  not;  and  none 
of  my  brethren,  tiiat  I  know  of,  do.    The  Catholic  believes  Uie  pope, 
ts  a  man,  to  be  as  liable  to  error,  as  almost  any  other  man  in  the  urn- 
verse.    Man  is  man,  and  no  man  is  infallible,  either  in  doctrine  or 
morals.     Many  of  the  popes  have  sinned,  and  some  of  them  have 
been  bad  men.    I  presume  my  worthy  antagonist  will  take  his  brush 
in  hand,  and  roll  up  his  sleeves,  and  lay  it  on  thera  hard  and  heavy ; 
80  will  1 ;  and  whenever  he  uses  a  strong  epithet  against  them,  I  will 
use  a  stronger.    But  let  us  return  to  the  gentieman's  authonty,  Du 
Pin.    We  come  to  the  council  of  Nice,  which  was  held  A.  D.  325, 
and  where  318  bishops  were  assembled.    This  council  was  convoked 
oy  the  first  christian  emperor  Constantine  the  Great,  at  the  suggestion, 
I  might  have  more  correctly  said  the  instigation  of  Sylvester,  bishop 
of  Rome,  and  of  course,  with  his  consent    Osius,  bishop  of  Cordo- 
va, and  two  legates,  Vitus  and  Vincentius,  presided  in  it,  in  the  name 
of  the  Roman  pontiff.    The  principal  doctrine  on  which  the  council 
was  assembled  to  decide,  was  the  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ  denied  by 
the  Arians.     From  the  manner  of  the  convocation  of  the  council,  the 
circumstance  of  its  having  been  presided  over  by  the  representatives 
of  the  pope,  or  bishop  of  Rome,  the  submission  of  the  entire  chris- 
tian worid  to  its  decrees,  and  the  authentic  records  of  its  transactions 
which  have  reached  us,  we  have  the  most  convincing  evidences  of  the 
reverence  which  was  even  then  entertained  for  the  successor  of  St. 
Peter ;  and  the  best  practical  illustration  of  the  wisdom  that  estab- 
lished his  pre-eminence  of  rank  among  his  bretiiren,  to  wateh  over 
the  purity  of  doctrine,  the  soundness  of  morals,  the  uniformity  of 
discipline,  and  the  maintenance  of  union  among  the  churches.     What 
more  direct  and  satisfactory  testimony  could  we  require  of  the  supre- 
macy of  the  see  of  Rome,  than  the  distinct  recognition  of  its  authori- 
ty by  so  venerable  an  assembly  1    And  what  if  rival  claims  were  ad- 
vanced by  other  sees  1    This  ambitious  spirit  is  as  old  as  Christiani- 
ty, as  ancient  as  the  origin  of  the  human  race.    The  aposUes,  them- 
selves, strove  for  the  mastery.    They  contended  which  of  them  was 
the  greater.    But  this  rivalry  only  served,  in  the  end,  to  establish 
more  firmly  the  precedency  of  the  claim  of  St  Peter.    In  answer  to 
the  pretensions  of  the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  the  council  says  to  him, 
"As  the  bishop  of  Rome  has  his  primacy  in  Rome,  so  the  bishop  of 
Alexandria  has  his  primacy  in  Alexandria."    It  says  to  him,  "you 
have  no  cause  to  complain— if  he  has  his  authority,  you  have  yours ; 
in  yonr  respective  sees,  or  churches,  you  have  the  chief  control ;  but 
it  is  his  prerogative,  as  occupying  the  place  of  Peter,  to  wateh  over 
the  welfare  of  all."    "Neither,"  says  Du  Pin,  "does  it  disprove 
THE  PRIMACY  OF  ROME."    The  council  offered  a  sedalire  to  the  pride 
of  rtie  bishop  of  Alexandria,  or  asserted  his  authority  in  his  own  see, 
but  it  does  not  disprove  the  primacy  of  Rome* 


DBBATB  021  'TBX 


W 


Wliit  mine  do  you  want  than  what  God  has  caused  to  he  thus  re- 

copiMi  'Mie  I 

The  dissension  first  oriffinated  among  the  patriaichal  sees.  The 
counsel  took  cognizance  of  it,  and  deciaed  according  to  the  rules  and 
usages  of  the  apostolic  and  immediately  subsequent  ages.  From  this, 
whatever  follows,  it  surely  does  not  follow  that  there  was  no  primacy 
in  Mome* 

Me  says  that  the  bishop  of  Constantinople  assumed  to  call  himself 
the  universal  bishop,  and  that  the  emperor  winked  at  it.  What  does 
this  mean  1  Why  that  the  crafty  emperor,  and  the  more  subtle  bishop 
intended  to  compel  Rome  to  acknowledge  Constantinople  as  hei 
equal.    This  attempt  of  the  emperor  and  the  patriarch  illustrates  the 

K>int  at  issue,  and  clears  it  in  fact  of  any  difficultv.  Thev  knew  that 
ome  was  referred  to  on  every  occasion ;  and  that  her  decision  was 
final.  They  were  jealous  of  her  authority.  The  manner  of  this  as- 
sumption ot  the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  and  of  the  emperor  wink- 
ing at  it,  are  in  fact  proofs  of  the  supremacy  of  Rome.  Now,  thought 
the  proud  Greek,  I  will  bring  this  haughty  pontiff  of  Rome  crouchmg 
ill  my  feet,  I  will  make  him  surrender  all  his  authority,  and  we,  the 
•niperor  and  myself,  will  divide  the  earth  between  us.  It  was  there- 
fore that  tlie  bishop  made  this  assumption,  and  that  the  emperor  winked 
at  it.  It  was  in  this  unjust  and  intolerable  sense  of  the  term  Universal 
Father,  that  Gregory  who  deserves  all  the  praise  which  has  been 
given  him,  and  more,  objected  to  its  assumption.  It  was  thus  that  he 
iQprobated  the  title  of  universal  father. 

If  the  bishop  of  Rome  now  claims  to  be  called  the  first  pastor  in 
Christendom,  he  pretends  to  be  no  lord  of  the  consciences  of  his  breth- 
ren, or  dictator  of  the  terms  of  salvation  to  the  servants  of  God. 
He  acknowledges  with  humility  his  own  intrinsic  nothingness,  unless 
supported  by  God,  and  guided  and  guarded  by  him  in  the  administra- 
tion of  his  eminently  responsible  office. 

He  is  a  father  because  he  breaks  the  mystic  bread,  and  dispenses 
the  spiritual  nourishment  of  sound  doctrine  to  the  souls  of  the  people 
of  God.  He  is  a  father  because  to  him  we  appeal  in  our  doubts,  and  to 
him  refer  in  every  emergency,  as  to  the  vicar  of  Christ. 

The  term  Universal  father  was  likewise  worthy  of  the  condemna- 
tion of  Gregory,  in  the  bad  sense  in  which  it  was  assumed  by  the  pa- 
tiiaich  of  Constantinople,  viz.  that  of  lord  and  master  of  spiritual 
power  amd  of  the  consciences  of  the  brethren,  so  as  not  to  need' or  ask 
the  advice  of  the  bishops.  The  pope  never  gives  a  decree  without 
taking  counsel  from  his  constitutional  advisers,  availing  himself  of 
the  light  of  present  wisdom  and  past  experience.  He  takes  all  human 
means  to  weigh  the  subject  well  and  to  come  to  a  sound  and  scriptural 
conclusion.  Discard  the  pope— sever  from  the  communion  of  the 
chiirei  of  Rome,  and  you  lose  all  claim,  or  shadow  of  claim  to  a  con- 
nexion with  the  apostles.  Hear  Waddiuffton  speaking  of  the  Vaudois— 

**  In  0iar  joarney  back  towaitls  the  npostolic  times,  these  leparatiits  conduct 
Of  ■§  fitr  as  the  beginning  of  the  tweU'th  century;  but  when  we  would  adTance 
fiurther,  we  ar*  intercepted  by  abroad  region  of  darkness  and  uncertainty.  A 
■park  of  hope  is  indeed  suggested  by  the  history  of  the  Vaudoi ».  Their  origin  is 
not  ascertained  by  any  authentic  record,  and  being  immemorial,  it  may  have 
been  coeval  with  the  introduction  of  Christianity. 

••But  since  there  is  not  one  direct  proof  of  their  existence  during  that  long 
■piice;  since  they  have  never  been  certainly  discovered  by  tlie  cnriosity  of  any 
writer,  nor  detected  by  the  iiiquisitorial  eye  of  any  urthodox   bi&licip    nor 


KOMAN   CATHOUC    ASUUION. 


wmed  by  aay  pope,  or  council,  or  mnj  church  record,  chronicle,  nr  memorial. 
we  are  not  justified  in  attaching  any  historical  credit  tu  their  mere  unsupportea 
tntdition.  It  is  sufficient  to  prove,  that  they  had  an  earlier  existence  than  tut 
twelfth  century;  bat  that  tdey  had  then  been  peri>etuated  throach  eight  ot 
nine  centuries,  uncommemorated  abroad,  and  without  any  national  monumenl 
to  attest  their  existence,  Is  much  more  than  we  can  venture,  on  such  evidence. 
to  assert.  Here  then  the  golden  chain  of  our  apostolic  descent  disappears. 
and  though  it  may  exist,  buried  in  the  darkness  of  those  previous  ages,  ana 
though  some  writers  have  seemed  to  discern  a  few  detached  links  which  thev 
diligently  exhibited,  there  is  still  much  wanting  to  complete  the  continuity.  * 
rPmee  554  of  the  Hutory  of  the  Church  from  the  earliest  age$,  by  Rev.  Geo. 
Waddin^on,  A.  M.fdhw  of  Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  and  Prebendary  tjf 
fkrrime,  in  the  emthedral  ehnrch  of  Chichester,  J>few  York  edition,  1835.] 

Well  if  Christ  established  a  church  on  earth,  that  church  must  be 
eathoUe,  •*  I  believe  in  the  holy  catholic  church,"  is  the  language 
of  tfie  apostles  and  of  councils,  of  Protestants  as  well  as  of  Catholics. 
The  /rtk;  church  must  be  catholic.  What  church  then  is  catholic  1 
The  universe  answers  the  question — ^Italy,  France,  Spain,  Austria, 
Ireland,  South  America,  Canada,  five  hundred  churches  lately  erected 
in  England,  Calcutta,  Ceylon,  Oceana,  all  the  islands  of  the  Pacific 
and  the  Atlantic :  even  in  every  country  where  Protestantism  is  dom- 
inant, Denmark,  Norway,  Sweden,  the  testimony  is  given,  and  tha 
words  »*  I  believe  in  the  holy  catholic  church"  are  used  by  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  who  alone  have  a  nght  to  use 
them.  Applied  to  any  other  church  they  are  a  misnomer.  Protestant* 
cannot  employ  such  language.  They  are  cut  up  into  a  thousand  dis- 
cordant and  chaotic  sects.  As  no  oUier  church  but  ours  is  ftow  cath- 
olic, so  no  other  but  ours  ever  has  been  or  will  be  catholic.  **  Chris- 
tian is  my  name  and  Catholic  my  surname,"  said  Pacian.  With  love 
fjid  charity  to  all  men  the  Roman  Catholic  church  subsists  throughout 
all  time,  teaches  all  truUi,  and  gathers  into  her  communion  the  chfldren 
of  every  clime.  What  she  lost  in  one  region,  she  gained  in  another. 
The  axe  of  persecution  that  lopped  off  some  of  her  branches,  made 
the  vigorous  trunk  produce  the  more  luxuriously. 

*•  InvestiKating,"  says  Fletcher,  *'  in  those  countries,  where  either  Christianity 
has  once  subsisted,  or  where  it  subsists  at  present — the  monumentt  which  ther 
exhibit,  and  interrogating  these  (tnomimenls  have  voices,  my  brethren,  that  igMM 
plainly^) — it  will  be  found  that  they  all  loudly  attest  the  greatness  and  the  an- 
tiquity of  our  religion.  "We  are  Catholics,"  the  venerable  ruins  say,  **afii 
the  tmbkmi  even,  which  still  adorn  us,  shew  it.*'  It  is  so,  likewise,  not  only  in 
the  monuments,  which  were  once,  or  are  vet,  sacred  to  religion,  but  in  a  great 
variety  of  other  vestiges.  The  proofi  of  the  ancient  splendor  of  Catholicity  are 
legible  on  almost  every  object,  that  has  seen  the  tide  of  ages  roll  away,— on  the 
piUaces  ofprinces,— on  the  castles  of  the  great, — on  the  gates  of  citJesr>-on  the 
asvluros  ofcharity, — on  the  tombs  of  the  dead.  They  may  be  read  in  the  con- 
stitutions and  laws  of  kingdoms — in  the  foundations  and  rules  of  universities,-* 
in  the  customs  and  peculiarities  of  the  vulgar.  *»»«»« 

It  is  indeed,  possible  that  prejudice  may  object  to  those  arguments,  that 
••they  are  very  general  and  inclistmct, — ^proving,  it  is  true,  that  in  almost  every 
nation,  and  in  every  are,  there  has  existed  a  widely  diffused  religion, — a  Catholic 
religion,  bat  not  provmg  that  this  religion,  its  principles  and  doctrines,  were  I'Z 
erery  mg%  the  same — in  every  age,  the  identical  rel'mon,  which  the  Catholic  be- 
lievei  at  present/'  It  i«  the  essence  of  the  true  rehgion  to  remain  unchanged ; 
and  to  have  descended,  and  to  descend  alvrays,  down  the  stream  of  time,  without 
corruption  or  alteration.  If,  therefore.  I  undertake  distinctly  to  prove,  that  the 
Catholic  religion  of  the  present  period  is  indeed,  the  true  religion,  then  should 
I  also  distinctly  prove  that  it  has  never  undei^one  any  alteration,  and  that  it  is 
the  same,  which,  revealed  originally  to  mankind,  has,  during  the  course  of  eigh- 
t«*en  centuries,  formed  always  the  object  of  the  veneration  of  the  orthodex  be- 
liever." vol.  2,  p.  173 

C  4 


1 


"■PHP 


DIBITS  ON  IHV 


**  Ai  tt  WHS  the  ddifra  of  God,  that  tiie  trna  cimrch  should  be  Cslholic;  to  it 
vaa  also  hii  desien.  that  the  true  church  thould  alwari  be  distinriiished  by  tha 
lumonlile  appetlation  of  Catholic: — as  it  was  the  wilt  of  Jeini  Cnrist,  that  the 
fatabliahiiMiiit  which  he  Ibroied*  should  extend  through  eTerj  nation,  and  subMat 
ibroueh  every  age ;  so  alao  it  was  his  wtllt  that  this  establishment  should  be  dw* 
nifed  bf  a  uanie  correspondinr  to  these  great  characteristics.  **  I  believe,"  tna 
•poniet  commarded  the  faithful  io  every  age  to  say,  **mik€  hohi  Caihcujc 


every  age  to  say, 

CtemcA. '  *-  oy  this  name  Cathouc,"  says  St  Austin,  **imm  rammtd  m  Hu 
CyiiMsc  ehurcht"  **  my  namet"  adds  St.  Paciaii,  **  it  CkH§Hmmi  my  »wmmm§ 
CAHIOUC;  mnd  by  this  SURNAME,  /  am  diwtmgmilud/rim  oli  the  Mtcta  tf 
ht^m.  Sermon  on  the  catholicity  of  the  church,  page  195,  roL  ii.  Baft, 
edit.  1130.  '^ 

It  IS  certainlv.  my  beloved  friends,  a  very  animating  circumstance,  to  viewtha 
iwaeMity  and  the  long  duration  of  our  churcli;  to  see  it  stretdbiag  out  ito  em. 
llittellirougii  every  climate;  consoling  by  its  beneits,  and  enlightening  by  its  doc- 
trines, the  remotes*  comert  of  the  universe:  to  see  it  existing  through  the  long 
lapse  oi  so  uiany  ages,  unmoved,  while  the  strongest  empires  sink  to  ruin;  and 
anshalcen.  while 'all  things  fall  in  decay  around  it.  It  is  animating  to  remark  it 
triumphant  over  all  the  powers  ofdaricness,and  the  exertions  of  human  malice; 
cwnbaung  otien,  it  is  true,  with  the  ttonas  of  penecutioa  and  the  artifices  of 
heresy ;  vet  combatinr,  always,  to  come  off  with  victory;  riding  through  the  lem* 
pest,  and  exalted  by  the  very  means  which  had  been  levelleaat  its  depression. 
Ibid,  page  198. 

From  this  contemplation,  my  christiaD  friends,  we  mar  derive  the  consoling 
assurance,  that  happen  or  be&l  what  may,  thougli  the  oillows  of  persecution 
swell  and  the  tide  of  error  rage;  every  enbrt  to  destroy  the  church  shall  turn 
out  fruitless.  The  church,  these  aeeneeassure  you,  tt  an  edifice  protected  by  the 
hand  of  the  Almightj,  a  rock  fixed  on  the  basts  of  the  divine  power  amid  the 
tea  of  human  life.  The  billows  of  persecution  shall  swell,  the  tide  of  error 
dash  against  it  in  vain.  They  will  no  more  move  it,  although  they  may,  in- 
deed, sweep  away  many  of  its  ungatarded  members,  than  the  gentlest  'spray 
will  move  the  ftrmest  mountain  that  the  ocean  laves.  1  should  be  sorry  to  tee 
Hm  ■ttifoftuoe  happen,  yet  could  I  behold  the  most  furious  tempest  gathering 
llilhcNit  one  feeliog  of  anxietjf  for  the  stability  of  the  church.  As  the  Ptolmist 
•iqrsv  **ii  thauJd  comn  io  notking,  Ukt  the  rumnianf  wuier"  (Ps.  Ivii.)  It  would 
fwove  but  the  preparation  for  fresh  conquests.  The  security  of  the  church  amid 
alima%  darinf  the  long  interval  of  eighteen  centuries,  is  alone  sufficient  assur- 
mam  of  itt  security,  amid  the  fury  of  fiiture  tempest    Ibidem,  pa^e  198. 

If  it  can  be  proved  that  the  Catholic  church  had  not  these 
diaiaeteiistiGe,  we  admit  she  is  not  the  church  of  Christ.  I  shall  go 
til  trial  on  this  point.  If  she  has  ever  ceased  to  teach  the  whole  doc- 
trine of  Christ,  to  difliise  over  all  nations,  the  true  christian  precepu, 
or  if  she  has  not  had  a  larger  body  of  professors,  than  any  of  the  sects, 
that  separated  in  every  successive  age  from  her  communion,  then  will 
I  yield  the  question.  But  it  will  try  the  ingenuity  of  the  gentleman 
io  pnnre  any  suchthin^,  and  still  more,  to  show  in  that  ease,  what 
Mieh  was  catholic.  Tliis  difficulty  meets  him  at  the  very  threshold. 
''"""■      expired] 

Three  o'ehek^  P. 


Mr.  Campbell  rl 

My  leamed  and  worthy  opponent  commenced  his  forenoon  speech, 
■ayimff  that  he  found  before  htm  a  more  easy  task  than  he  had  expect- 
ed. Were  it  a  question  of  rhetoric  rather  than  of  logic,  I  confess  I 
should  have  more  to  fear.  He  has  b^n  more  accustomed  than  I,  to 
Urn  Umiaif  of  that  art  I  am  rather  a  matter  of  fact  man,  and  logic 
more  ilian  rhetoric  has  occupied  mj  attention. 

I  apprehend,  however,  before  this  discussion  is  ended  he  maj  find 
his  task  not  quite  so  easy  as  he  would  seem  to  anticipate.  And  to  me 
the  good  book  has  suggested  a  caution  which  I  hope  always  to  remem- 


BOMAN   CATHOUC    B8LIGION. 


87 


her.  It  is  happily  coached  in  these  words, "  Let  not  him  that  huck- 
leth  on  his  armor  boast  as  he  that  taketh  it  off.*' 

But  to  examine  his  defence,  so  far  as  in  it  there  is  reference  to  my 
speech,  has  he  not  made  in  the  very  first  effort  an  unfortunate  admis- 
sion !  The  name  Caiholie  he  admits  is  generic  and  the  name  Roman 
speciflc<--and  that  the  term  Roman  only  indicated  the  church  in  which 
this  caUiolic  communion  is  to  be  enjoyed  :  that  the  universal  church 
is  found  in  the  particular,  the  genus  in  the  s]>ecies.  Thus  we  can 
have  Greek  catholic,  English  catholic,  American  catholic,  as  well 
as  Roman  catholic.  These  particular  universals  are  susceptible-  of 
indefinite  multiplication.  And  so  the  catholicity  of  Rome  is  specifi- 
cally the  same  with  that  of  England ! ! 

His  second  admission  is  equally  unfortunate.  He  did  not  seem  to 
perceive  that  he  argued  for  me  rather  than  against  me,  on  the  word 
fiUher,  He  said  that  it  could  not  be  underst(K>d  literally.  8o  said  I. 
How  then  mnst  it  be  used  but  religiouslv  1  Call  no  man  your  religions 
or  ecclemastic  Father.  He  has  then  fully  conceded  all  that  I  aw.  It 
it  then  an  id>8olute  prohibition  of  the  Roman  Catholic  notion  of  a 
supreme  holy  Ikther.  To  designate  any  person  pope  is  then  a  viola- 
tion of  Christ's  command. 

The  gentleman  has  admitted,  somewhat  reluctantly  however,  that 
the  Doway  catechism  is  a  standard  work,  and  that  the  definition  of 
the  church  is  indRdUbly  oorreq|.  My  argument  hitherto  has  been  to 
shew  that  the  supreme  head  called  pope,  being  of  the  essential  ele- 
ments, nay  the  chief  element  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  and  not 
found  eith^  in  the  bible  or  ecclesiastic  history  ffn*  ages  after  the  chris- 
tian era,  the  church  of  Rome  is  a  aeet  in  the  true  import  of  thai 
word,  and  not  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches,  for  she  cannot 
he  older  than  her  head,  unless  a  body  can  exist  without  and  before  its 
head,  which  is  impossible.  It  is  not  the  nature  of  that  head,  whether 
political  or  ecclesiastic  or  both,  but  the  simple  fact  of  its  existene« 
eonceming  which  we  enquire.  The  nature  and  claims  of  the  head 
may  heieuW  he  the  subject  of  examination.  That  the  Roman  sect 
is  divided  into  lour  parties,  touching  the  supremacy— one  affirming 
that  the  pope  is  the  fountain  of  all  power  political  and  religious— 
another  teachingr  that  he  has  only  ecclesiastic  supremacy— «  third 
party  affirming  mat  his  ecclesiastic  dominion  is  over  all  councils,  per- 
■ODf  and  things  spiritual,  and  a  fourth  party  limiting  his  jurisdiction 
to  a  sort  of  executive  presidency-^  a  proposition  susceptible  of 
am}ile  prool^  and  of  much  importance,  but  we  wi^  it  to  be  very 
distineUy  stated  that  the  question  now  helore  us  is  the  feet  that  a 
head,  or  universal  father,  pope  or  patriarch,  is  not  found  in  the  Roman 
empire,  east  or  west,  for  six  hundred  years,  and  consequently  that 
during  that  time  that  church  did  not  exist,  whose  four  essential  ele* 
■lents,  are  a  pope  or  supreme  head,  bishops,  pastors  and  laity. 

I  am  the  more  diffuse  on  this  point  because  my  learned  opponent 
reems  tomis^ethe  question  or  to  confound  it  with  another  of  adifib* 
rent  category.  He  seems  to  be  squinting  at  infallibility,  authority. 
Older  in  Uie  ministry,  rather  than  looking  in  the  face  the  simple  ques- 
tion, was  there  a  pope  in  any  church  for  ihefirtt  six  centuries  ?  Authority 
is  not  infallibility,  nor  is  order,  supremacy.  I  go  for  authority  in  the 
president  of  the  United  States,  but  who  infers  thence  that  I  hold  the 
president  to  be  in£illible !  I  go  for  order  in  the  christian  church,  but 
what  has  this  to  do  with  the  supremacy  of  tiiie  bishop  of  Romcl 


t. 


I 


DSBATS  OM   TUB 

Why,  I  empli«tli«llj  ask,  iom  the  bishop  of  Cincinnati  confound  ths 
fiwsiioii  of  fiwjt  hmm  m  with  that  concerning  the  Levitical  priests 
llMMi.    I  lisw  not  tgitsted  ■ndi  a  question. 

Ami  what  hare  my  viewt  of  church  order  and  government  to  do 
with  the  question  before  us.  Why  drag  these  matters  into  discussion. 
Bid  I  not  distinctly  say  that  I  came  not  here  to  defend  the  tenets  of 
any  party  of  ProteHMtt,  but  the  jpreat  princiDles  of  Protestantism  I 
Aim  what  have  my  views  of  chuich  order  to  tfo  with  the  questions  at 
lliue!  Of  these  however  the  gentleman  is  wholly  misinformed.  I  am 
ihe  advocate  of  order,  of  a  christian  ministry,  of  bishops  and  deacons 
ii  the  church.  Without  order  no  society  can  eiist,  and  therefore  no 
tiaaimable  man  can  object  either  to  order  or  authority  in  the  church 
But  again  I  ask  what  is  this  to  the  question  in  debate ! 

lio  gare  OS  too  a  dissertation  on  the  passage,  "  Invest  thou  me  mors 
tinn  ikmeJ*  This  Is  certainly  gratuitous  at  this  time.  I  am  glad 
however  th«  gentleman  has  delivered  himself  on  this  text  But  this 
is  niit  tlio  question  now.  We  are  seeking  for  a  head  for  the  church, 
g  ptfMl  Md  Ibr  the  ehmvoh  In  the  first  ages,  while  our  friend  is  ex- 
pounding scriptures  on  other  themes. 

To  the  authority  of  Du  Pin  the  gentleman  seems  to  except.  But 
mi  what  authority  does  he  object!  His  works  are  certiHed  by  the 
JoctoTS  of  the  Soiboone  and  by  the  guardians  of  the  Catholic  press. 
Will  he  say  tint  Iw  is  not  an  authentic  historian  I  Du  Pin  was  bom 
and  edneated,  lived  and  died  and  was  buried  in  the  Roman  Catholic 
•Imnk  Tlie  gentleman  proved,  two  or  three  months  a^,  that  general 
lift  Fayette  was  a  Roman  Catholic  because  he  was  baptised  in  ths 
iluireh  of  Rome  and  burled  in  consecrated  ground.  Certainly  then 
Bo  Pin  was  all  this  and  more !  It  matters  not  whether  he  was  a  Jan- 
•■nist  or  Jesuit.  Both  orders  have  been  at  different  times  in  good  and 
bad  repute.  Jansenlsts  have  sometimes  been  proscribed,  and  Jesuits 
have  been  snfpwssed.  But  the  question  is  not,  was  he  a  Rood  Ca- 
tholic, but  iwif  Is  on  muikenik  kitionmn  ^  For  a  good  CathoFic  is  one 
Iking,  and  a  good  historian  is  another.  I  wish  the  gentleman  to 
■Mwer.  (Bishop  PureeU.  I  answer  emphatically,  he  was  not  an  an* 
iMiitic  historian.) 

Then  this  gentleman  and  the  bishop  of  Bardstown  are  at  variance. 
The  latter  gentleman,  if  I  mistake  not,  admitted  In  a  diseussion  pub- 
lished In  the  Catholic  paper  of  that  place,  that  Du  Pin  was  an  authen- 
it  kislorian.  I  have  seen  this  work  repeatedly  quoted  In  discussions 
between  Romanists  and  Protestants,  and  I  do  not  reeoliect  to  have 
seen  any  thing  advanced  against  his  authenticity.  Mr.  Hoghes  of 
Philadelphia,  but  on  different  grounds  than  those  stated  by  my  opponent, 
dM  Indeed  object  to  him  as  a  lalthlul  witness  in  his  controversy  with 
Mr.  Breckenndge.  However  while  1  wish  it  to  go  to  the  fiublie  that 
bishop  Purcell  has  objected  toDu  Plii  as  an  authentic  historian,  I  will 
distinctly  state  that  I  rely  upon  him  in  this  controversy  only  so  far  as 
he  Is  sustained  by  other  historians,  and  therefore  I  will  only  quote 
him  In  such  matters  as  I  know  can  be  sustained  from  other  sources. 
Other  historians  record  the  same  fact,  and  many  of  the  works  which 
Du  Pin  quotes  are  not  only  extant  but  accessible. 

The  word  eaihoHe  the  gentleman  has  stated  that  it  is  of  high  anti- 

Jnity  and  found  at  the  head  of  some  books  of  the  New  Testament. 
lut  how  came  it  into  the  New  Testament  1     Was  it  Robert  Stephens 
ef  Pinia  that  placed  it  there  in  the  16th  century  as  a  sort  of  general 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 

Beading  to  certain  epistles,  or  was  it  placed  there  by  the  apostlee 

Touching  the  council  of  Nice  and  whether  Sylvester  had  any  thing 
to  do  with  its  convocation,  may  hereafter  be  worthy  of  discussion ; 
at  present  this  is  not  before  us.  The  decree  of  the  council  and  its 
convocation  are  distinct  things.  . 

Of  the  texts  relied  on  by  me  to  dispose  of  the  pretensions  of  supre- 
macy, the  gentleman  has  taken  special  exception  to  Ep.  iv.  H.  and 
would  have  different  ordere  of  ecclesiastic  powers,  rather  than  gtJU 
for  the  edification  of  the  church  and  the  fitting  of  saints  for  the  work 
of  the  ministry,  to  be  contained  in  that  passage.  But  the  text  says 
mfU  and  not  lordakipi.  Of  these  gifts  vouchsafed  by  the  ascended 
Savior  the  first  was  apostles.  "  He  gave  first  apostles,  secondanly 
prophets,"  and  here  again  "he  gave  some  apostles  and  some  pro- 
ph^."  No  supremacy  is  expressed  of  an  individual.  It  is  not  ranks 
of  authorities  Uke  civil  or  military  functionaries,  such  as  magistrates, 
aldermen,  constables,  &c.,  but  gifts  of  light  and  knowledge  and  grace, 
the  splendid  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  gifts  of  teaching,  preaching,  ex- 
horting, and  setting  up  the  tabernacle  or  church.  The  aposUes  had 
all  authority  and  all  «fts  themselves ;  but  they  needed  assistants  and 
a  distribution  of  labor,  and  not  an  hierarchy,  in  laying  the  foundation 
and  in  fitting  saints  for  the  work  of  the  christian  ministry. 

Having  now  touched  all  the  relevant  points  in  the  Bishop  s  opening 
speech,  f  hasten  to  my  argnment.  .../..         .v 

On  examination  of  the  New  Testament,  the  pnmiUve  fathers,  the 
councils  both  provincial  and  general,  down  to  the  close  of  the  6th  cen- 
tury, we  do  not  find  in  the  whole  territory  claimed  by  our  opponents 
as  vet,  the  idea  or  name  of  a  supreme  head,  pope,  or  vicar  of  Christ. 

My  learned  antagonist  has  not  produced  any  such  document,  and 
doubtless  he  knows  if  there  be  any  such  authority  now  extant,  and 

would  produce  it.  .^  i.     •  i  " 

The  strong  expressions  of  Saini  Gregory  in  opposition  to  the  titte 
shew  what  a  singular  novelty  it  was  in  Rome  during  "his  ponttfi- 
cale,'*  and  his  bold  declaration  not  only  of  the  arrogance  and  blas- 
phemy of  the  title,  but  of  its  aspect  to  all  the  bishops,  as  annulling 
their  equality,  sufficiently  prove  that  he  rightly  appreciatwi  its  torue 
meaning  and  its  hostility  to  the  genius  of  that  simplicity  and  humility 
which  comported  with  the  servants  of  Christ.  So  far  then  as  we  have 
examined  the  evidence  on  hand,  the  defence  of  the  Bish<^,  the  argu- 
ment as  now  developed  stands  thus :— a  pope,  or  unlveisal  patriarel^ 
is  the  first  essential  element  of  the  Roman  Catholic  sect.  But  there 
was  no  such  penonage  in  existence  for  600  years  after  Christ,  there- 
fore there  was  no  church  of  Rome,  in  the  sense  of  the  creed,  during 
the  first  six  centuries. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  narrate  the  circumstances  which  ushered 
into  being  the  pope  of  Rome.  Mauritius  the  emperor  of  the  East  died 
It  tlie  hand  of  Phocas  a  centurion  of  his  own  army.  Mauritius  fop 
vored  the  pretensions  of  the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  and  turned  a 
deaf  ear  to  the  importunities  of  Gregory  on.  the  subject  of  taking  from 
bishop  John  the  tide  of  universal  father,  so  painful  to  the  pnde  and 
humility  of  the  great  Gregory.  For  the  saint  had  vmtten  to  the  en^ 
peror  on  the  arrogance  of  John,  metropolitan  of  the  great  diocese  of 
the  east  Mauritius  was  supplanted  and  the  throne  usurped  by  Pho- 
Giegory  rejoiced  at  his  death,  and  hailed  the  elevaUon  of  his 

ca 


t\ 


g^HtaflUriiiiau 


Ig^l 


MM 


ilr 
111 


WEBATM  (Mf  TH:1 

it  ihe  tliioiie.    Gmmnj  ooneeonied  IiIib«  in  ^e 

of  St.  John  the  Baptist  at  Constantinople,  and  Phocas,  aa  •  fa 
wafd  for  hia  consecration  and  laToraMe  regards,  conferred  opon  the 
■ueoeasor  of  Gregory,  Boniface  the  third,  the  title  of  ufdvermi  pairi^ 
mwk  in  the  very  sense  in  which  it  had  been  repudiated  by  Gregory. 
Thus  in  the  year  606  two  years  after  the  death  of  the  saint,  th« 
iiat  pope  was  placed  in  the  chair  of  the  Galilean  fisherman,  si  in- 
deed Peter  had  erer  sat  in  a  chair  inRome. 
Conoeminf  the  eonseeratioa  of  Phoeas,  Mr.  Gibbon  thus  remaifca: 
■*Tbeteiwte  andcleivf  obeved  hii  trnnmoni,  and  as  lOon  as  th«  patriarei 
was  aanrad  of  hit  orthodox  belief,  be  consecrated  the  toccenful  oaarper  in  tbe 
thanh  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  On  the  third  day,  amidst  the  aoclannlioDs  of  a 
ttoofhtless  peopk,  Phocat  made  his  pnbtic  entry  in  a  chariot  drawn  by  four 
white  hortei :  the  revolt  of  the  troopa  was  rewaitled  by  a  lavish  donation,  and 
the  new  sovereif  n,  after  visitii^f  the  |ialace,  beheld  from  his  throne  the  SanMt 
of  the  hiDpodrome.**    Oibboa's  Dertme  and  Fall  Ron.  £ni|i.  ¥oL  viii.  p.  269. 

But  me  infidel  hm  food  leason  to  laugh  at  Ihe  aaint,  where  he  re- 
iaiia  the  exultation  of  Gregory  at  liie  death  of  Mauritiva. 

"  Asa  snbject  and  a  christian  it  was  thn  dn^  of  Gregory  to  acquiesce  in  tha 
caCabiished  fovemnent;  but  the  jojrfnl^  applanse  with  which  he  salutes  the  for* 
tunes  of  the  assassin,  has  sullied  with  inaelible  disgrace  the  character  of  th« 
■aint.  The  successor  of  the  apostles  might  have  inculcated  with  decent  firm- 
ness the  guilt  of  blood,  and  the  necessity  of  repentance:  he  is  content  to  cele* 
brate  the  deliverance  nMfthepeople  and  the  fiill  of  the  oppressor;  to  rejoice  that 
the  piety  and  benignity  of  Phoeas  have  been  raised  by  Providence  la  the  imperial 
iirone;  to  pray  that  his  hands  may  be  strengthtnnd  against  all  his  enemies ;  and 
to  express  a  wish,  perhaps  a  prophecy,  that  after  a  long  and  triumphant  rein,  he 
■ay  be  translerred  from  a  temporal  to  an  everlastinr  kingdom."  Id.  ib.  p.^11. 

It  looks  indeed  aa  if  Gregory  had  permitted  the  recollection  of  the 
conduct  of  fifauritiua  towards  hia  rival  to  minffle  with  hia  exultations 
at  the  elevation  of  Phocaa.  When  we  recollect  that  Mauritius,  his 
wife,  four  sons  and  three  daughtera  were  immolated  at  the  ahrine  of 
^e  ambition  of  Phoeas  because  he  feared  a  rival,  we  are  astonished 
that  saint  Greffory  could  have  called  heaven  and  earth  to  rejoice  in  hia 
exaltation  to  Uie  throne  of  the  Cesars.    His  words  are  : 

**  Benifoitatem  vestne  pietatts  ad  imperiale  fastigium  pervenltse  gandemnt. 
Lsdaatur  coeil  et  exultet  terra,  et  de  vestris  benignis  actibus  noiversae  retfiubltcne 
MNMlusnane  usque  vehementer  afflictus  hilaresca^"  Ac.  Gref^.  L  xi.  ep.  38,  ind.  vi. 

nSt  ia  not  80  honorable  to  the  aneeeaaore  of  Boni&ee  the  third,  that 
the  title  of  nope  in  ita  aopreme  import^  waa  eonierred  by  ao  mean  a 
wretch  aa  Pnoeas  the  laiifer  wmd  muiderart  and  nlhei  aa  a  nwaid  for 
the  teiaporixing  and  easy  virtne  of  Gregory  the  fint.  Boniftce,  though 
ialincBlalogiittof  popes  he  atands  the  66tliin  descent  from  Peter,  waa 
in  truth  the  iiai  pope  of  Rome  in  the  aenae  whieh  ia  placed  in  the 
CateehJaaiB  and  atandards  of  the  preaent  ehureh  nf  Rome. 

Jm  yet  the  power  waa  only  eceleaiaalte«  Bui  power  ia  naturally 
flvmnlative,  and  especially  ecelesiaatic.  Let  any  pereon  be  imagin« 
ad  to  wear  at  hia  firdle  the  keys  of  heaven,  and  the  aword  of  apiritoal 
power,  let  him  have  kings  Jd  princes  bLwIag  at  his  footst^l,  and 
we  shall  soon  see  him  like  Napoleon,  atretching  out  hia  hand  not  only 
to  jrraap  the  gorgeous  crown  of  ecelesiaatic  but  of  political  power. 

Mut  to  complete  the  story  of  the  origin  of  the  papal  power  we  must 
idd  a  few  words  on  the  assumptions  of  Saint  Zachary,or  Stephen  the 
Second.  Pepin  the  father  of  Charlemagne  waa  in  the  cabinet  of 
Childeric  the  king  of  France  in  those  days.  His  master  was  a  feeble 
prince  and  he  waa  an  ambitious  miniater.  He  knew  the  power  of  the 
pope,  and  beibro  he  dared  to  aeiie  the  thioDtof  his  master  he  deemed 


ROMAir  CATHOLIC    BKUGION. 


81 


^tr:;^n^gtfhiitx^^ 

miration,  helcized  the  crown  of  his  master,  and  rewarded  the  pope 
wiAsMne  temporal  power  :-certain  states  in  Italy  which  by  his  son 
rll^rlpftL^at  were  aufrmented,  till  he  had  the  domimon  of  the 
a^denTAtirL'S'tr:^^^^^  and  the  Exarcha^  IfrZ^P^e 
peradded  to  his  spiritual  jurisdiction.    Then  ^^.f  ,^«,^^^"^*  ^^^^ 
crown  and  the  two  swords^and  stood  ^^'\^f^^^^J^^^.^^ 
the  prophetic  characters  of  the  ««F"»S  ^"'^      mm«  p^S^ 
aiastic  corporation  called  the  church  of  Rome.— [Tmie  expired.  J 

Half  pad  3  o'cAicA^  P.  M. 

Bishop  Pubceix —  j.  *v    * 

Fellow  citi»ena-My  friend  objects  to  my  explanation  of  the  term 
u  Rom^CaSolic."  He  observes  that  it  has  turned  out  no  explan^ 
tion  at  all.  His  difficulty  of  apprehension  on  this  particular  pomt,  is  to 

me%owever,  perfectly  Wll\gible:     "»«  ^^?.  "^^bf  a?S  kt^  h^ 
a  oroof  of  its  unity  and  universality ;  and  this,  as  he  dislikes  i^  he 
Lnnot^  of  course,  understand.    The  word  'catholic'  in  ancient  days 
Z  S^!  rSy  Xer  old  and  new  words  in  Webster's  dicUonarv, 
foTmC^^oses  than  one.    Its  true  and  principal  «ense  was  easily 
nsc^ined  in  its  application  to  the  whole  catholic  church  of  Chnst. 
uZTTo  used  ufVlesignate  the  authority  of  certain  chief  nattonal 
churches,  to  distinguish  them  from  inferior  churches  in  the  same  dis- 
teicts,  and  to  mark  the  superiority  of  archbishops  and  patnarchs  oyer 
SJek  brethren  in  the  Episiopacy.    The  name  of  "  Roman  Catholic" 
ahewed  the  bond  of  union  which  bound  all  these  various  churches  in 
the  profession  of  the  faith   of  the  chief  see  of  the  entire  christian 
world.    Hence  it  always  brought  to  the  believer's  mmd»  in  every 
dime,  the  church  which  was  tie  head,-the  great,  pnmitive,  senior 
church,  the  church  of  Rome;  and  as  njore  people  b^ame  convertwl 
to  the  faith,  they  were  called  by  their  different  and  distinct  appella- 
tiona,  aa  English  Roman  Catholics— American  Roman  Catholics- 
French  Roman  Catholics,  &c.  , . 
As  to  the  prohibition  from  calling  any  man  « Faiher,^  &c.  I  said  it 
was  not  meant  literally,  and  this  he  seizes  as  an  admission  that  it  is 
a  prohibition  from  calling  "  Father"  i"  a?.f<^l««i^*^*^,,f  ^:     F^ 
mav  be  true  or  not,  but  it  does  not  prohibit  us  from  calling  the  head 
of  our  church  "  fether"  as  one  who  cherishes,  instructs,  and  otherwiso 
acta  the  part  of  a  father  towards  ua;  aa  he  who  adopta  an  orphan 
child  ia,  ma  figurative  sense,  his  father,  though  not  literally  married 
to  his  mother.    The  gentleman  cannot  therefore  underetand  me  aa 
admitting  his  argument  in  my  previous  explanaUon.    But  this  is  mat- 
ter too  insiffnificant  to  waste  more  time  on  it. 

Mr.  CanTpbell  tells  us  the  church  had  no  head  for  600  yeare.  fhia 
ia  a  strange  representation !  The  church  was  then  a  headless  body. 
I  never  hiard  of  a  body  without  a  head,  on  which  all  the  membera 
depend  for  the  vitol  influences.  But  was  there  indeed  ho  head  to  the 
chSrch  %  Was  not  Jesus  Christ  the  head  %  and  I  say  further  that  hia 
servant  on  earth,  his  humble  servant,  was  the  pope.  The  language 
o?Christ  himsek  "on  this  rock  wUl  I  build  my  church,"  refere  not 


■11 


DEBATE   ON   TBI 

to  tli«  divine  head  of  the  chureh  in  Heaven,  but  to  the  ropie«entatiT0 
©f  his  divine  commission  on  earth.  I  affirm  that  what  Christ  thought 
necessary  in  ihe  days  of  the  apostles,  is  necessary  now ;  and  the 
■lore  remote  we  are  from  that  day,  the  more  necessary  does  it  become. 
Jesus  Christ  well  knew  that  there  must  be  scandals  and  errors;  and 
M  determined  his  church  should  not  be  left  headless.  We  know  this 
head  exists  and  where  it  resides ;  but  we  are  not  slaves  in  the  Cap 
Iholic^chufch.  We  acknowledge  no  mere  human  authority  between 
us  and  God.  We  are  as  free  and  untrammeled  as  any  people  under 
heaven.  It  is  not  the  man,  but  the  authority,  we  inspect.  The  man 
may  err,  and  if  the  pope  claims  a  power  not  belonging  to  him,  we 
soon  remind  him  of  his  mistake.  How  this  lesson  has  beea  lamrht 
to  a  few  popee,  the  history  td  the  ohuroh  will  show.  ^ 

My  fnend  now  contradicts  the  statement  he  made  to^ay.  He  first 
aigaed  that  the  introduction  of  patriarchs,  archbishops,  bishops, 
deacons,  and  so  on,  into  the  church,  was  of  exotic  growth— and,  as  if  be 
had  forffotteiwhat  he  had  previously  denied,  he  turns  round,  and  tells 
us,  neariy  in  the  same  breath,  that  he  goes  for  bishops  and  deacons  and 
ofders.  So  far  then,  Mr.  Campbell  is  a  good  Catholic,  and  I  congra- 
Mate  him  on  this  advance  towards  the  truth.  [Symptoms  of  applause 
in  the  audience,  were  here  manifested,  but  were  immediately  checked 
by  the  moderators;  and  bishop  Purcell  besought  them,  once  for  all, 
to  abstain  from  the  least  demonstration  of  the  kind  during  the  debate. 
It  w^  improper  in  a  discussion  of  this  character,  and  the  house  beinir 
greatly  crowded,  much  inconTenienoe  would  follow,  and  the  debate 
mtM  not  go  on.] 

As  to  Oie  authority  he  has  produced  here  (Du  Pin's  Ecclesiastical 
history)  I  will  remark  that  I  consider  Du  Pin  a  learned  man.  I  would 
even  select  him  as  a  splendid  illustration  of  the  strength  imparted  to 
the  human  intellect  by  the  Catholic  intellectual  discipline.  He  was 
truly  a  prodigy  of  learning  and  of  precision  of  style.  But  there  was 
a  plague  spot,  a  gangrene  upon  him,  which  must  forever  neutralise  his 
antiiirity  as  a  Catholic.  Before  the  gentleman  pronounced  his  name 
we  bad  a  flourish  of  rhetoric,  and  a  labored  eulogy  upon  my  tact  In 
mana^ni  this  controversy.  For  my  part,  I  must  say  that  1  am  quite 
a  novice  in  these  matters— I  am  not  accustomed  to  debate.  My  fnend 


bH 


_      _    _  my  irtend  relies  as  Catholic  authority,  recoinitsed 

b¥  the  chureh,  was  in  constant  eorrespondence  with  Wsie,  the  arch- 
bishop of  Canterburv.  He  tried  every  stratagem  to  brimr  about  a 
re^imon  of  the  chureh  of  England,  and  the  chureh  of  Rome.  I^eib. 
nita,  md  many  a  disUngnished  name,  had  previously  labored  in  the 
SiBie  vocation.  But  Revd.  Dr.  Du  Pin's  motives  were,  unfortunately, 
snspieiiiiis.  He  proposed  as  the  basis  of  the  le-union,  the  abolition 
of  annevlair  confession,  of  religious  vows,  of  the  Lenten  fast  and  ab- 
stonence,  of  the  pope's  supremacy,  and  of  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy. 
Me  was  hinself,  like  Cranmer,  secretly  married ;  and  after  his  death, 
his  pretended  wife  came  publicly  forward  to  assert  her  right  to  hi6 
goods  and  chattels.    And  this  is  Catholic  authority ! 

It  is  said  these  papers  were  discovered  in  his  study  after  his  death. 
But  he  was  censured  by  pope  Clement  XI.  even  during  his  life-time: 
Slid  when,  as  1  have  steted,  Louis  XI V.  removed  him  from  among  th^ 
lloetimi  of  the  Sorbonne,  Clement  approved  the  act. 


SOMAN   CATHOLIC    BELI6I0N. 

If  my  friend  can  produce  Roman  Catholic  authority,  let  him  do  so. 
But  let  him  not  produce  one  that  approaches  with  a  mask.  11m 
authority  of  Du  Pin  I  have  challenged  on  iusl  grounds ;  but  this  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  views  I  have  stated  upon  the  great  question 
we  are  discussing. 

We  are  told  that  the  commission  spoken  of  in  Ephesians,  4th 
chapter,  "  To  some  he  gave  apostles,  &c."  confers,  not  powere,  but 
simply  gifts,  'fhis  I  deny.  St.  Paul  tells  us  authority  was  given  to 
the  rulere  of  his  church  by  Christ,  not  for  their  sakes  but  thcit  we  maif 
be  no  longer  children  tossed  to  and  fro  by  every  wind  of  doctrine.  They 
were  not,  dien,  merely  gifts,  they  were  powers  and  authorities  to  re- 
gulate the  church,  and  to  rule  the  people  of  God.  These  commissions 
are  the  foundation  of  the  church  esteblished  on  earth  by  Christ,  before 
he  ascended  on  high.  They  were  necessary,  as  the  more -solid  parte 
of  a  temple  are  nrat  laid,  that  the  whole  building  may  afterwards 
have  strength,  consistency,  and  symmetry.  I  deny  that  the  church 
ever  has  been  or  could  be  without  a  foundation.  The  foundation  is 
at  kast  as  necessary  as  the  superstructure.  Christ  made  Peter,  there- 
fore, the  rock  of  his  church,  and  was  himself  the  comer  stone  whereon 
that  rock  rested,  as  did  the  whole  edifice  seevrolT  rest  upon  the  rock. 

Why  has  Mr.  Campbell  anticipated  the  subjeet  of  the  third  or 
fourth  day  of  this  discussion,  and  brought  up  the  pope  as  the  man  of 
siii~-the  sea  monster  of  Daniel — the  youngest  horn  of  the  beast  1  &c. 
For  aught  I  know,  he  may  prove  the  pope  to  be  the  sea  serpent— no 
doubt  his  powers  of  logic  are  adequate  to  the  task.    W^e  shall  see.  ^ 

Again — the  pope  is  not  a  tyrant,  nor  does  he  claim  the  title  of  Uni- 
vereai  Father,  in  the  sense  in  which  Gregory  rebuked  John  for  claiming 
It  Mr.  Campbell  has  solved  the  question  beforehand,  in  steting  the 
arrogant  pretensions  of  the  bishop  of  C.  P.  who  pretended  that  all  au- 
thority preceded  from  him.  I  do  not  derive  all  my  authority  from  the 
pope.  The  bishops  of  the  United  Stetes  consult  together.  They  propose 
candidates  for  the  vacant  sees ;  and  they  send  to  Rome  the  names  of 
three  clergymen,  marked  according  to  their  judgment,  "Worthy, 
Worthier,  Worthiest."  The  pope  generally  truste  to  their  wisdom, 
and  acquiesces  in  their  choice.  It  was  thus  that  a  certain  testimony 
of  my  fitness  to  succeed  the  venerable  Fenwick,  as  bishop  of  this 
diocese,  was  forwarded  to  Rome.  The  sovereign  |>ontiff,  Gregory 
XVI.  ratified  the  selection  of  the  j^relacy  of  the  United  Stetes,  and 
expedited  the  brief,  or  letters,  in  virtue  of  which  I  was  ordained  a 
bishop ;  but  my  power  to  consecrate,  to  baptize,  and  to  perform  other 
episcopal  functions,  comes  not  firom  the  pope ;  it  comes  like  ibM  of 
the  apostles,  directly  from  God. 

There  are  other  denominations,  besides  the  Catholic,  that  contend 
for  the  necessity  of  apostolical  succession  of  ordere  and  mission,  and 
these  too  are  the  objecte  of  my  friend's  sarcasm.  I  select  only  twi>-« 
tiie  Episcopalians  and  the  German  Reformed. 

In  the  last  number  of  his  Millennial  Harbinger,  in  speaking  of  tiic^ 
Episcopalian  bishop  OteyofTennessee,  he  asks  "why  is  bishop  Otey 
silent?  He  either  feels  that  his  castle  of  Episcopalianism  has  been 
demolished  by  the  editor  of  the  Harbinger  (Mr.  Campbell)  or  he  does 
not.  If  he  feels  that  it  has  been  overthrown,  as  an  honest  man  hs 
ought  to  acknowledge  it  But  if  he  still  thinks  that  he  is  adorning 
"  &e  doctrine  cf  Go^*  by  sustaining  Episcopalianism,  let  him  shew 
his  strength  to  such  as  wish  to  read  both  sides  of  the  question.    It  is 


I 


84  BBMn  m  m 

•n  tpostolie  sdmonition  to  «*  eontend  earnestly  foi  tlie  fmth  delivered 
in  tlie  saint!.'*  If  he  is  sent  of  God,  as  he  professes  to  be,  as  a  faith* 
M  watchman  on  ZIon's  walls,  he  should  not  lemain  mute ;  but  err 
ilond,  seeing  his  opinions  have  been  poHUly  assailed.    Pereontator/* 

An8wer.T— Many  reasons  might  be  imagined  for  bishop  Otey's  si- 
lenee,  but  I  will  tentuie  upon  only  one,  viz.  that  like  M.  de  La  Motte 
(I  orotnme  the  witty  and  pious  bishop  of  Amiens)  he  is  waiting  for  a 
tii|Mf  to  Atf  mknee*    How,  &c. 

Again— Mr.  Lancellot  Bell,  addressine  the  editor,  Mr.  Camnbell 
ftH.  Mil.  Harbinger,  p.  670.)  says  «i  accompanied  brother  L  to 
uavetown,  where  he  addressed  the  citizens,  &c.  Two  of  the  ••  called 
and  iani*'  of  the  German  Reformed  church,  considering,  I  suppose, 
tMr  '^eitH  in  danger,'*  earns  to  the  place,  and  I  spoke  against  these 
llings,  eontradktini,  who  ware  foiiig— to  express  it  in  the  language 
of  some  of  the  peoDle,  Hi  ••lick  m  np  like  salt,"  &c.  &c. 

Mr.  Campbell,  itsfefore,  has  changed  his  tone ;  he  is  now  in  favor 
off  ocdeii ;  and  this  change  has  apparently  taken  place  within  a  few 
clays. 

I  have  proved  that  the  headship  of  ^••e  church  vras  no  new  thing 
in  tiie  heginninff  of  the  fourth  century.  Du  Pin  spoke  of  the  decision 
tiff  iio  council  of  Nice,  itepecting  the  contest  between  the  bishops 
of  Alexandria  and  of  Rome,  but  said  that  this  decision  of  the  council 
did  not  disprove  the  primacy  of  Rome,  so  that  this  doctrine  is  at  least 
■8  old  as  the  year  318,  when  Sylvester  of  Rome  presided  by  his 
legate  Osius  of  Cordova  at  the  council  of  Nice.  This  shows  that  the 
mtfaority  of  Rone  was  then  recognised.  He  spoke  of  the  council  of 
Chaleodon.  I  have  here  an  authentic  historian  recognized  by  the  Ca- 
tholics, and  one  who  tells  sharp  troths  of  individual  Catholics,  when 
ho  conceives  them  to  be  in  the  wrong.  It  is  Barronius.  In  his  Annals, 
|oi*  of  Oiiriat  451,  of  pope  Leo,  12th,  t#enty  seventh  of  Valentine  and 
mi  of  Mtieian,  he  says  that  in  tilis  council  the  authority  of  the  see 
if  Peter  was  recognised.  360  bishops  met  in  this  council.  Cirrum- 
■tewsos  not  permitting  pope  Leo  to  assist  at  it  in  person,  he  sent  threo 
legates,  two  bishops  and  a  priest,  to  preside  in  his  name.  At  the  first 
ieialon  Pasehasinus,  bishop  of  Lillibeum,  and  One  of  the  legates  of  the 
popo,  pielerrod  charm  against  Dioscorus,  patriarch  of  Alexandria,  for 
n  ineanonieal  conduct  in  the  conventicle  of  Ephesus. 

Bioseoras,  thus  accused  and  convicted,  was  compelled  to  leave  hit 
ie^nd  sit  in  an  inferior  place  in  the  middle  of  the  assembly.  Snb- 
isfiintly  a  sentence  of  deposition  was  pronounced  against  him ;  and 
St  iir*  was  manifest,  he  lefl  the  assembly  and  appeared  no  more. 
The  miiers  of  the  council  unanimously  exclaimed  that  the  doctrinal 
doeiilois  of  Leo  weie  thoee  of  Peter  himself—"  Petrus  per  Leonem 
locntus  est"— Peter  hath  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Leo.  (vid.  Reeves, 
lat  vol.  ffi3.)  the  fathers  of  the  council  directed  to  St.  Leo  a  synodical 
letter,  in  which  they  acknowledge  him  for  the  interpreter  of  St.  Peter, 
Ibf  thoif  head  and  guide."  (vid.  Barronius,  ibid.)  Now  here  is  the  au- 
•ority  of  the  first  general  council  of  Nice,  as  quoted  by  Labbe, 
ilreek  bishops  say: 

^      ^  CJOUNCIIA 

•JJh*  Roman  church  has  ahfrajB  had  the  ^riwaey."    (Labbe.  t  2.  p.  41.) 
The  moond  general  council  and  first  of  Constantinople  st^s : 
**  Lat  tki  bithop  of  Coottaiitiw>ple  have  the  int  thaie  of  hooor  a/Vcr  the  biih 
opofllAWM."    (Alexandria  wii  cBCitM  to  the  Mcond  rank.l 


BOKAH  CATHOLIC   RSLIGION. 

The  IhinI  general  eonncil  of  Ephesus  says  i  .  .   ^  ^  ,. 

*  St.  Feter,  the  prince  aod  bead  of  the  apostles,  the  tbandatioa  of  the  Cathoae 
chnrcht  received  the  keys  of  thekiogdom  from  our  Lord  Je*u8  Christ,  and  the 
power  of  loosiof  and  of  biading  sin  was  given  to  him,  which  to  the  present 
time,  as  it  ever  has  done,  subsists  and  ejterciws  judgment  in  his  8ucces«>rs. 

TTie  fourth  general  council  of  Chalcedon,  writing  to  St.  Leo,  says : 

••  We  therefore  entreat  you,  to  honor  our  judgment  by  your  decrees;  and  as  wa 
have  adhered  to  our  head  in  good  things,  so  let  your  supremacy  supply  what 
becometh  (or  is  wanting)  for  thy  children."  .... 

The  council  of  Florence  in  which  the  Greek  and  Latm  bishops  wero 

present,  thus  speaks :  .*..,•. 

"We  define  that  the  holy  apostolic  see  and  the  Roman  pontiff  hold  the  prima- 
cy over  the  entire  earth,  and  that  he  is  the  successor  of  the  blessed  Peter,  tha 
prince  of  the  apostles,  the  true  vicar  of  Christ,  and  the  head  of  the  whole  chorch, 
Ac.    T.  13.  p.  515.  ,      -  „      . 

The  general  council  of  Trent,  speaks  m  the  foUowine  terms : 
"The  sovereign  pontiffs,  in  virtue  of  the  supreme  power  delivered  to  them 
•ver  the  entire  church,  had  a  rig^hi  to  reserve  the  judgment  of  certain  more 
grievous  crimes  to  their  own  tribunal."  ,  •»  «_ 

Melancthon  holds  the  following  language,  as  quoted  by  Bossuet  to 

his  history  of  the  variations.  L.  5,  n.  24. 

"  Our  people  agree,  that  the  ecclesiastical  polity,  in  which  are  recoeniiad 
supetior  bishops  of  many  churches  and  the  bishop  of  Rome  superior  to  all  bim^ 
ops,  is  permitted.  Thus  there  is  no  contest  respecting  the  supremacy  of  the 
pope  and  the  authority  of  bishops,  and  also  the  pope  and  the  bishops  could  easi- 
ly preserve  this  authority,  for  it  is  necessary  for  a  church  to  have  leaders  to 
matntam  order,  to  keep  an  eye  upon  those  called  to  the  ecclesiastical  state,  and 
upon  the  doctrine  of  the  priesU,  and  to  exercise  ecclesiastical  judgment,  ao  that 
Ifthere  were  no  bishops  we  would  have  to  make  them.  The  monarchy  of  tha 
pope  would  also  serve  much  to  preserve  amount  many  nations  the  unity  of 
doctrine;  wherefore  we  couM  easily  agree  at  to  the  supremacy  of  the  pope  if  wa 
could  agree  in  everr  thing  else." 

Ijfcibnitz,  as  quoted  by  De  Starck,  p. 23,  speaks  as  follows: 
••  Ai  God  is  the  God  of  order,  and  as  by  divine  appointment,  the  bodjr  of  the 
only,  apostolic.  Catholic  church  can  be  maintained  by  a  single,  hierarchical  and 
universal  government,  it  follows,  that  there  must  be  a  supreme  spiritual  chief, 
who  shall  be  confined  within  proper  bounds,  established  by  the  same  (divine) 
right,  and  invested  with  all  the  power  and  dictaiorial  authority  necessary  for 
the  preservation  of  the  church." 

VATHEKS. 

St.  Irenwus  of  Lyons,  the  disciple  of  St.  Polycarp,  who  himself  ap- 
pears to  have  been  consecrated  by  St.  John  the  Evangelist,  repeatedly 
urges  this  argument  against  his  contemporary  heretics.    He  saifs : 

•♦  We  can  count  np  those  who  were  appointed  bishops  in  the  chnrches  by 
ibe  apostles  and  their  successors  down  to  us,  none  of  whom  taught  thu  doctrine. 
But  as  it  would  be  tedious  to  enumerate  the  succession  of  bishops  in  the  diflfi^ 
ent  churches,  we  refer  you  to  the  tradition  of  that  greatest,  most  ancient,  and 
univemlly  known  ehurcb.  founded  at  Rome  by  St.  Peter  and  St  PmI,  and 
which  has  been  preMrred  there  through  the  succession  of  iU  bilhflfit,  down  to 
the  present  time." 

TertuUian,  who  also  flourished  in  the  same  century  (year  150),  arguet 
in  the  same  manner  and  challenges  certain  heretics  m  these  terms ; 

"Let  them  produce  the  origin  of  their  church;  let  them  display  the  succession 
of  their  bishops,  so  that  the  first  of  them  may  appear  to  have  been  ordained  by 
an  anostolic  man,  who  persevered  in  their  communion." 

St.  Athanasius  wntes  to  St.  Felix,  the  Roman  Pontiff: 
••For  this  purpose  Christ  placed  you  and  your  predecessors  to  guide  the  ark 
and  to  have  tbe  care  of  all  the  churches,  that  von  may  help  us." 

St.  Cyprian,  in  his  56th  Epistle,  holds  the  following  language : 
**Th«y  cutre  to  sail  and  carry  letters  to  the  chair  of  Peter  and  tba  pnacipal 
ciuii«h,  wbenfte  sacerdotal  unity  proceeds." 


t 


i 
If' 
1 


■lit 


DSBATS  Off   TUB 


1 


iipoiig 

•'There  are  luanj  otiier  thino  whkli  keep 
rhureb.  Th«  a^enient  of  diHereiit  people  and  oattoiis  keeps  me  there.  TU« 
authority  establmhed  by  miracles,  nourished  bj  hope,  increased  bj  charity,  and 
conAruied  by  antiquity,  keeps  me  there.  The  sncceision  of  bishops  in  the  see  of 
St  Peter,  the  apostle  (to  whom  our  Lord  after  hu  resurrection,  committed  hit 
■heftfi  to  be  hd)  down  to  the  present  bishop,  keeps  me  there.  Finally  the  werj 
■ante  of  CAthouc  which,  among  so  many  heresies,  this  chnrcfa  alone  possesses, 
keeps  me  there.** 

St.  Jerome  in  Ms  4th  Epistle  to  pope  Damasas  says: 

••  I,  following  no  leader  but  Christ,  am  In  communion  with  your  holiness,  thai 
is,  with  the  chair  of  Peter.  Whoever  gathereth  not  with  you  scattereth,  that  is, 
whoever  is  not  of  Christ  is  of  anti-Christ.*' 

This  is,  in  substance,  the  testimony  of  the  bishops  throughout  the 
world,  in  ©very  age  to  the  prosent  time. — [Time  expired.] 


Mm.  CAMmBLLri 


#biir  o*eio€kf  P.  J£ 


On  the  subject  of  the  emendation  of  the  term  Roman  Catholic,  bi 
pefiiinff  the  word  English,  &c.,  I  am  willing  that  my  friend  should 
have  all  the  advantage  to  be  derived  from  that  explanation.  I  am 
willliig  that  he  should  appear  before  the  public  with  that  explanation, 
if  ho  tliiiilis  it  can  help  the  matter.  On  the  same  principle  he  may 
say  the  Philadelphia  Pittsburg  church  of  Cincinnati.  The  church, 
I  argued,  had  no  mortal  head  for  six  hundred  years.  He  certainly 
could  not  have  undenitood  me  as  denying  that  Christ  was  the  head 
of  Am  church !  I  admit  that  Christ  is  the  immortal  head  of  the  church 
which  is  his  body,  and  Christ  is  her  only  head.  Christ's  church  ra> 
quires  a  living  and  omnipresent  head.  She  needs  not  two  heads,  for 
her  head  is  the  head  of  all  firinoipality  and  power.  Can  the  pope  be 
eainipresent,  keeping  order  in  mil  his  dominions  1 

I  was  surprised  at  the  gentleman's  hvpothesis,  that  if  I  argued  that 
the  church  had  no  visible  and  human  head  for  six  hundred  years,  I 
tiien  asserted  that  Christ  was  not  the  head  of  his  church.  I  spoke 
mot  of  Christ,  hut  of  the  great  hierarch  on  earth,  who  claims  to  be  the 
fenmtmin  of  all  power  ami  authority  in  the  church.  Could  he  not 
nnderstand  me  I 

The  fsnlleman  says,  that  the  Catholics  are  as  free  as  others.  I  ask 
hmve  tiiey  the  same  liberty  to  read  the  Bible,  to  think  and  act  for 
llMmselves,  as  have  the  Protestants  1  I  am  soiry  that  he  seemed  to 
take  advantage  of  mw  acknowledginf  mvaelf  a  niend  to  bishops  and 
deaeoBS  in  the  churoh.  In  my  enniMmuon  of  the  different  oiden,  in 
the  present  Roman  church,  I  mentioned  JrtaMiishops  and  J^dMeaeons  | 
but  he  did  not  hear  me  say  bishops  and  deacons.  They  were  on  pur- 
poee  left  out  of  that  enumeration,  that  I  might  not  fall  mto  the  error 
whiek  he  has  imagined  for  me. 

I  dispose  of  the  gentieman's  extract  from  the  Millennial  Hari>inger 
and  of  his  learned  remarks  upon  them,  by  informing  him  that  he  has 
mistaken  the  writer :  I  am  not  the  author  of  the  article  in  question. 

Still  I  must  ask,  why  this  evasion  of  the  question  m  debate!  Why 
seek  to  excite  the  odium  theologicum,  on  account  of  some  distorted 
Iheorr  unjustly  attributed  to  me— on  subjects,  too,  wholly  foreign  to 
this  debate !  Are  these  the  weapons  by  which  my  learned  opponent 
Is  eimpelled  to  defend  the  '^wtomtwd  wddrm  of  all  churohes^  from 


ROMAN    CATHOUC    RKU6ION. 


87 


llie  charge  of  unseriptural,  mad  vnfbunded  assumptions  ?  Let  no  one 
imagine,  however,  that  1  am  at  all  opposed  to  order  and  government 
iii£e  church.  As  far  as  concerns  oversight,  or  the  having  of  bishops 
to  preside  over  the  flock,  I  am  an  Episcopalian.  I  am  for  having  pres- 
byters or  elders  in  every  church.  I  do  not  believe  in  a  church  without 
presbyters  or  bishops.  So  far  I  am  both  a  Presbyterian  and  an  Epis- 
copalian* ^ 

On  the  subject  of  the  primacy  of  Rome,  the  gentleman  quoted  Baij 
fonius,  and  snaried  at  Du  Pin.  But  it  is  too  late  for  any  bishop  of 
Rome,  or  of  England  to  stand  up  in  this  nineteenth  century  and  tell 
US  that  Du  Pin  is  not  an  authentic  historian.  My  friend  intimates 
that  the  certificates  in  the  preface  were  suborned.  What  a  charge  on 
the  learned  and  venerable  author  of  this  work ! 

JBUhop  Pureell  here  uiid,  thai  thoie  eertifieatei  being  in  ike  bookpro^ 
nothing  i — thai  they  might  have  been  ptU  there  by  the  printer,'] 
I  will  now  read  these  attestations  and  vouchers  that  you  may  judge 
bow  gratuitous  are  the  objections  and  insinuations  of  the  bishop* 

THE  APPROBATION  OF  THE  DOCTORS  OF  THE  80RB02fNE. 

**The  whole  world  has  openly  declared  the  esteem  which  they  think  due  to 

the  JVew  HUtory  (f  EecUniuitemL  Wntere,  that  we  could  not  but  be  sensible 

of  the  complaisance  shewn  to  us,  since  the  judgment  we  had  formed  of  it  was 

followed,  supported  and  authorized  by  that  of  the  public. 

j»  «       ',    '^'^    «  «  «»  «  •  •  • 

**AH  those  who  have  already  read  them,  will  here  find  what  will  recall  to  Ihei? 
memory  many  things  they  may  have  forgotten,  and  will  see  with  pleagure.  that 
our  author  has  reduced  their  doctrines  to  certain  principles,  by  which  they  show 
their  solidity  and  coherence.  Those  who  wish  to  read  them  will  here  nieet 
with  what  will  sare  them  mu^ktime  and  trouble;  and  those  that  are  engaged  w 
that  long  end  wearisome  journey,  will  at  least  have  tiie  advantage  of  a  faithful 
and  experienced  guide,  who  wift  lead  them  only  through  paths  equally  safe  and 
knownr  Both  the  one  and  the  other  will  meet  with  a  piece  of  criticism  which 
Is  always  clear,  prudent,  and  upright;  distinguishti  what  is  certain  from  tlt«« 
which  IS  fiilse  or  doubtful;  never  precipiUles  the  judgment,  nor  Uvs  down  sin- 
ple  conjectures  in  place  of  demonstrative  proofs;  gues  to  every  thing  what  it 
nerits,  purely  on  its  own  account ;  and  the  better  to  attend  to  reason,  banishes 
all  prejudices  and  looits  at  nothing  in  its  search  after  truth,  but  truth  itself;  nor 
condei»ns,only,  where  It  cannot  excuse.  »  t  » 

-Gi,.a  -  pLi-  A^-t  l<«h*.  ««|*^Mp,GNON.  ReC.r  of  S..  Menu. 

HIDEUX,  Rector  of  St.  Innocents." 

APFnOBATION  OF  THE  ROYAL  CENSOR.      ^  „  ^  „ .  , 

••  Bv  the  order  of  my  lord  Chancellor;  I  have  read  a  book,  entitled  **^  fnttorjf 

#  the  church  and  ofEccUiioMtical  Author*  in  the  sixteenth  eejUurv,'    by  Mes- 

!Ur  Lewis  EUies  Du  Pin.  Priest,  Doctor  of  Divinity  of  the  Faculty  <»*  P»™. 

aod  Reriui  Professor  of  Philosophy:  Containing  the  History  of  the  Church, 

and  of  ecclesiastical  Authors,  and  from  the  year  15o0,  to  the  year  1600;  # 

which  I  find  nothing  to  hinder  its  being  printed. 

«•  Given  this  l«th  day  of  Joituary,  1703.  ,«,,.., 

uivea  ui»  *  J  "^BLAMPIGNON,  Curate  of  St.  Mems." 

APPBOBATION  OF  THE  DOCTORS  OF  DIVINITY  OF  THE  FACULTY  OF  PARIS. 

«  We  whose  names  are  under  written,  Doctors  of  Divinity  of  the  Faculty  of 

Divinity  of  Paris,  certify,  that  we  have  examined  a  book,  entitled  **A  History 

of  the  Church,  and  ofeccleaiastical  Authors,  in  the  sixteenth  centunr;"  hv  Mes- 

•ieur  Lewis  EUies  Du  Pin.  Priest,  Doctor  of  Divinity  of  the  Faculty  of  Pkris, 

and  Reeitti  Professor  of  Philosophy  :  and  that  we  have  found  nothing  therein 

contranr  to  the  Catholic  faith,  or  to  good  manners.    In  assurance  whereof,  w« 

have  set  our  hands  this 20th day  of  January.  1703. ,<,»»• 

nave  set  our  u  j  BLAIvIPIGNON,  Curate  of  Si.  Merna 

HIDEUX,  Curate  of  St  Inuoccuts.** 


i 


I 


BBBATB  ON  TMM 


I  pit  it  now  to  tlM  food  oenae  of  bit  ondioiiee,  wlietlier  soeh  tesii- 
inoiiioi  HO  to  Iw  tot  oeide,  liy  styiiiff  tlitt  the  printer  moy  koTo  foixml 
ot  pimied  them  on  his  own  reAponeihilitT. 

no  divine  warrant  for  the  priraacv  of  the  pope  is  not  the  question 
on  which  the  gentleman  read  from  Barronius.  There  are  two  things 
io  OTeiy  history,— the  statement  of  foots,  and  the  comment  on  those 
facts.  The  opinion  of  the  historian  is  like  the  opinion  of  the  reader; 
hnl  tho  facts  stated  are  common  property ;  and  these  are  the  proper 
malerialo  of  Mb  work.  Barronius  does  not,  however,  on  the  point  in 
debate,  state  a  faei  contrary  to  Du  Pin.  lliere  were,  indeed,  prima- 
cies at  Alexandria^  Antioch,  Rome,  Constantinople,  Jerusalem.  But 
the  primacy  of  a  metropolitan,  and  the  doctrine  of  an  univerral  pri- 
niacy  ovor  all  metropolitans  at  any  one  place,  is  a  differeo*.  matter.  I 
could  not  nnderstand  in  what  sense  he  meant  to  be  understood  when 
he  said  Gregory  could  not  go  for  primacy  in  **  that  sense."  Was 
ihoro  m  peoiuiar  mysterious  meaning  attached  to  the  claim  or  title 
which  Qiogofy  reprobated !  It  has  not  been  proved  that  any  contem* 
DOiaiy  mdorstood  it  so.  I  affirm  that  there  was  not  an  intelligent 
Daiiolio  of  that  day  who  understood  the  title  of  universal  patriarch, 
in  any  other  sense  man  tliat  in  which,  it  is  understood  among  us  now. 
The  poison  irst  established  in  the  primacy  of  Rome  exercised  a  uni- 
voisal  superintendency  over  the  church  exactly  similar  to  that  first 
elaimed  by  the  bishop  of  Constantinople. 

My  firiend  says,  *  the  author  from  whom  he  read  joa  states  the  fact 
of  such  a  primacv  early  in  tho  Roman  Church.*  If  we  examine  tho 
mlhority  we  shall  see,  it  is  nothing  but  the  opinion  of  a  fallible  man; 
Hid  iml  opinion  contrary  to  all  ancient  history.  I  affirm  that  them 
is  no  ocdosiastical  historian  of  authority,  who  attests  the  fact,  whidi 
he  is  desirous  to  prove.  It  is  one  thing  to  state  a  lact,  as  a  historian. 
Hid  anothor  to  stalo  m  Ofinbn  or  commentary  on  a  hcU  The  oues- 
tioii  befoie  us,  is  not  the  metropolitan  primacy  of  Rome,  or  Antiochf 
Off  Akxandita;  hnl  the  universal  primacy  of  the  whole  church ! 

I  adnil^  at  to  tho  council  of  Nice,  what  it  was  said  Du  Pin  asso|v- 
ted,  vix.  *  that  the  sixth  canon  does  not  deny  the  primacy  of  Rome.* 
But  Du  Pin  goes  further, — (and  why  did  not  the  gentleman  read  all 
that  Du  Pin  asserts  1}  I  read  it  all.  1  told  the  whole  truth  respect- 
fofr  it^-4he  gentleman  has  told  vou  but  the  half  of  it — Du  Pin  shys 
^  ids  canon  does  not  preclude  the  Idea  :*'  but  **  tiaYicr,'*  says  he,  ^Ulom 
M  miMUk  tf.**  I  am  for  quoting  the  whole  authority.  Du  Pin,  as  a 
fJliioUc,  was  endeavoring  to  find  some  authority  for  supporting  tho 
antiquity  of  the  primacy  of  the  see  of  Rome.  Ho  is  examining  tho 
mmm  of  the  council  carefully,  and  he  says  that  though  this  canon 
does  not  preclude  the  primacy,  "yit  NxrrHra  does  it  ■stasush  it." 
It  alTorded  him  nothing  for  or  against  it.  And  what  other  decree  or 
council  did  establish  itl !     That  is  a  secret  tho  bl^op  will  never 

Ii0t  ns  now  return  to  my  argument.  I  loll  off  at  the  year  750,  and 
was  In  pursuit  of  the  day,  when  the  present  church  of  Rome  began. 
I  hasten  to  establish  it. 

It  would  be  both  tedious  and  unnecessary  to  read,  or  narrate  the 
Quarrels  between  Nicholas  of  Rome  and  Photius  of  Constantinople, 
on  the  vital  question  who  shall  be  the  greatest  1  which  greatly  pre- 
pared the  way  for  the  grand  schism.  We  have  not  time  for  this,  as 
we  are  now,  before  we  sit  down,  to  give  you  the  day  and  date  of  the 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    SBLI6ION. 


d9 


i 


separation  of  the  Roman  church  from  the  Greek  church,  wliich  must 
be  regarded  as  the  day  of  her  separate  existence,  when  she  became 
what  she  now  is,  o  fclwiih  or  •ec/.  .     ,     ..^  .      , 

There  was  a  violent  contest  between  the  patnaich  of  Constantmoplo 
and  the  patriarch  of  Rome,  or  pope,  if  you  please,  (for  I  state  em- 
phaiically,  that  the  idea  of  a  supreme  head  of  the  church  had  never 
been  digested  in  the  east,  and  though  the  eastern  church  may  have 
submitted,  or  acquiesced  for  the  time  being,  she  never  did  consent  to 
it).  The  promotion  of  the  layman  Photius,  gifted  and  splendid  as 
he  was,  to  the  primacy  of  Constantinople,  greatly  vexed  his  holiness 
of  Rome.  Indeed,  from  the  time  of  Victor,  bishop  of  Rome,  A.  D. 
197,  who  assumed  to  exercise  jurisdiction  out  of  his  proper  diocese, 
in  respect  to  the  observance  of  Easter,  there  never  was  a  cordial  feel- 
ing of  unity,  or  co-operation  between  the  eastern  and  western  por- 
tions of  the  church.  The  arrogance  of  Victor,  called  for  strong  ex- 
pressions of  insubordination  on  the  part  of  the  Asiatic  brethren,  who 
claimed  for  themselves  as  much  license  to  dictate  to  the  western,  as 
he  had  to  ihe  eastern  church. 

The  ••  Catholic"  body  was  not  yet  divided  into  two  great  masses. 
Photius  had  charge  of  the  church  of  Constantinople.  Nicholas  of 
Rome  was  indignant  that  a  layman  should  hold  the  high  dignity  of 
patriarch  of  the  eastern  church,  however  the  emperor  and  the  church 
might  think.  To  make  matters  worse,  they  excommunicated  each 
other,  which  laid  the  foundation  of  dissentious  and  bad  feelings,  which 
to  this  very  day,  never  have  been  atoned.  For  the  jealousies  and  ri- 
valries of  these  two  bishops  never  slumbered  nor  slept,  till  the  church 
was  divided  into  what  have  since  been  called  the  Greek  and  Latin 
churches.  All  historians,  give  substantially  the  same  account  of  this 
matter.    I  will  read  an  extract  or  two  from  Du  Pin. 

•*Thoogh  the  Latin  and  Greek  churches  were  not  io  close  commnnion  with  etch 
other  ever  sioce  the  affair  o(  Phatiut,  jeX  they  did  not  proceed  to  ap  open  rup- 
ture till  the  tini«  of  pope  Leo  IX.  ^nd  of  Michael  Ceniterttit.  patriarch  of  C«i>- 
HantinopU.  Thit  breach  began  by  a  letter  which  th«  litter  wrote  la  the  yew 
1053.  in  his  own  nana,  aad  in  th«  name  of  Leo  archbiabop  of  Aendw  aad  of 
all  Bulgmrm,  to  Johm  bishop  of  Trmni  in  Apulia,  that  he  might  commiiiucate  it 
to  the  pope  and  to  all  the  western  church.  In  this  letter  they  reproved  the  Lmt- 
iiu  (ifBecause  they  made  use  of  unleavened  bread  in  the  celebration  of  the 
eucharist.  (2)  Because  they  fasted  on  Saturdays'in  Lent.  (3)  Because  they 
eat  the  blood  of  beasts^  and  thingt  strangled.  (4)  Because  they  UmJ  not  sing 
MUeluiah  \n  Lent."  Ac,  &c.    Vol.  ii.p.m  .      ,,        ,^ 

The  patriarch  of  Constantinople  first  anathematixed  Loo  IX.  oc- 
cleeiastioally  cursed  him  and  his  party,  and  this  may  have  provoked 
severer  measures  against  the  Greeks  than  were  at  fint  eontoBajplated 
b V  the  Latins.    It  w,  however,  an  important  hei,  that  ike  Gnm  wen 

The  pope  of  Rome  sent  three  legates  to  Constantinople,  under  pre- 
tence of  healing  the  divisions  and  strifes  existing,  who  had,  secretly 
In  their  pockets,  a  bull  of  excommunication  against  the  patriarch  and 
his  party.  They  were  instructed  to  exhort  him  to  yield  f  but  if  they 
found  him  incorrigible,  they  were  to  fulminate  against  hi  a  the  dread 
anathema.  After  a  fruitless  attempt  to  bring  over  the  patriarch  by 
mild  means,  they  entered  the  church  of  St.  Sophia,  at  noon  day,  on 
the  16th  of  July,  in  the  year  1054,  and  mounting  the  altar  read  aloud 
the  bull  of  excommunication,  before  the  people,  and  then  departeo, 
shaking  off  the  dust  ot  their  feet  against  the  patriarch,  his  city  and 
people.    The  bull  speaks  on  this  wise: 


I- 

i 


m 


OIBATK   ON   TRK 


*  The  Holj  Apostolic  m«  of  Rom*,  which  it  th«  diief  of  the  whole  world* 
In  witich  ••  to  th«  hMMi  bdongt  b  •  mora  offwcial  nraniier  the  cam  of  sll  tb« 
diachiit;  has  sent  us  to  tfaitfoyal  citj  in  the  quality  of  iu  legates,  for  the  weiitra 
mmI  paace  of  the  church,  that  as  it  is  written,  wa  shoold  go  down  and  see  whe- 
ther the  cries  which  pierce  its  ears  inm  thk  great  city  be  tm?  or  no. 

Let  therefore  the  emperoni,  clergy,  senate  and  people  of  this  city  of  Coostan- 
tinopie  know,  that  we  have  here  found  more  good  to  excite  oar  joy*  than  evil 
to  raise  onr  sorrow.  For  as  to  the  sapporters  of  the  empire,  and  the  principal 
citiiens,  tie  city  is  wholly  christian  and  orthodox:  bcit  as  for  Michael,  v^o 
took  upon  him  the  hhe  title  of  patriarch,  and  his  adherents,  we  have 
fimnd  that  they  have  sown  discord  and  heresjr  in  the  midst  of  this  city  • 
*  *  because  they  rdmjptited,  as  did  the  Arians,  those  who  had  been  bap 
tixed  m  the  name  of  the  bless«>d  trinity,  and  particutarly  the  Latins;  because 
witk  th$  Dmmiktg  lAiy  wmimimm  lAnlfJU  Gr$ek  ehurth  u  Ihi  miy  trut  ekurcht 

«mI  thmi  lit  incrpcci  'mmdkqpluMefmmu  eke  are  vrnUd^'* 

•        ••«-•••• 

The  Greek  chiiich,  be  it  noted  with  all  distinctneea,  did  stand  upon 
tiiie  jpointy  that  ale  was  ike  onfy  true  ekurek ;  and  tiud  no  ordinance^ 
kaphmm  or  ike  eutkairM.  wm  aimUmHd^  unkm  admnieiertd  kifkermw 
Ihoritjf, 

I  will  road  a  little 


•*  Michael  having  been  advertised  of  these  errors"  &c.ftc.  *•  refused  to  appear 
hcibre,  or  to  have  any  conference  with  us,  and  has  likewise  forbad  our  entrance 
iiMo  the  churches  to  perform  divine  service  therein  forasmuch  as  he  had  for- 
merly  shut  up  the  churches  of  the  Latins,  calling  them  Atwnitm,  persecuting 
and  excommunicating  them,  all  which  reflected  on  the  ho(y  see,  in  contempt 
wh«reof  he  stylod  himself  (EcuMBNic A L  or  DkitemmaIs  Patriarch.  Where- 
fore not  being  able  any  longer  to  tolerate  such  an  unheard  of  abuse  as  was  of- 
fifed  to  the  holy  apostolical  see.  and  lookiiu;  upon  it  as  a  violation  of  the  Ca- 
tholiis  laith  in  several  inetances.  &c.,  **  We  do  subscribe  to  the  anathema  which 
onr  nMMt  holy  &ther  the  pope  has  denounced  against  Michael  and  his  adhe- 

mlia  if  they  do  not  retract  their  errors/'  ftc.    Id.  ib.  p.  238. 

If  iieiit  there  be  anjt  truth  in  history,  from  that  day  the  present 
of  the  church  of  Rome  beffan  its  existence. 

It  never  was  fully,  or  cordialTy  conceded  by  the  Greek  church,  that 
the  pope  was,  or  ought  to  be,  the  universal  &ther;  and  it  may  ha 
aAnned  in  all  truth,  that  this  was  the  real  cause  of  the  schism* 

To  recapitulate,  thus  far,  in  seeking  for  the  paoal  head,  so  essen- 
tial to  the  Roman  efauich,  we  find  it  not  in  the  New  Testament,  in 
ili«  ancient  lathers,  in  the  canons  of  the  first  general  councils,  nor  in 
tile  history  of  the  church,  till  the  commencement  of  the  seventh  cen- 
taiy.  On  the  authority  of  Barronius,  it  is  said  that  Phocas  gave  the 
title  to  Boniface  the  3rd  in  the  year  606.  We  have  also  seen,  that 
f  apin,  another  usurper,  |ave  temporal  estates  and  political  dominion 
to  the  popes  about  the  middle  of  the  8th  century,  and  that  on  the  16th 
of  Jilly  10&4  the  Western  or  Roman  half  of  the  church,  after  having 
been  first  anathematized  by  the  Eastern  or  Greek  half,  did  solemnly 
•epaiate  itself  from  the  communion  of  the  Greek  church  by  an 
analhema.  Hence,  both  the  origin  and  the  name  of  the  church  of 
RiOim>'iF—'£Time  expired.} 

Maf-pad  4  o'eloeic,  P.  J£ 
Bishop  Pi  icill  nses— 

My  friend  Mr.  Campbell  has  fought  a  noble  battle  for  me.  I  shall 
prove  that  presently.  Cibbon  was  an  infidel,  and  became  so  be* 
•auae  his  father  would  not  allow  him  to  embrace  the  Roman  Cath* 
olic  faith.  He  was  a  prodigv  of  mind,  and  his  intellect  was  so 
precocious  that  even  when  only  sixteen  years  old,  he  read,  I  think 


BOlIAlf  CATROUC   SXLIOIOlf. 


41 


it  was,  Bossuet'B  UniTersal  History,  by  which  he  was  convinced  of 
Ihe  truth  of  the  Catholic  religion.  His  father  (sad  proof  of  the  re- 
stiaints  on  liberty  of  conscience,  as  exemplified  m  Protestant  coinmii- 
nities)  persecuted  him  for  this,  and  sent  him  to  Lausanne,  m  bwitecr- 
land,  where,  under  the  close  surveillance  of  P^'f^j^f^^^P^J^^ 
minister,  he  was  confined,  debarred  the  reading  of  Catholie  books, 
and  fed  on  bread  and  water,  till  at  last  he  yielded  his  creed  for  better 
&re.  He  thus  became  an  infidel,  and  wrote  against  all  religtoiis. 
But  a  man  who  could  thus  shrink  from  duty  to  that  fiiith  which  he 
believed  true,  because  he  viras  persecuted,  was  not  fit  to  JHPPreciate  the 
beauty  of  the  religion  that  had  attracted  him ;  nor  the  sublime  testi- 
mony  rendered  to  its  divinity  by  its  martyrs'  blood.  If  k«  «<»™ 
thus  prove  recreant  to  the  only  one  wMch  he  loved,  no  wonder  he  bo- 

came'opposed  to  all.  ..  ,  ,,        ^       .,...,„ 

Such  are  the  authorities  against  which  I  have  to  militate. 
The  irentleman  told  us  that  he  would  put  his  finger  upon  the  precise 
day  and  date,  as  recorded  in  history,  when  the  Roman  church  separa- 
te from  the  holy  and  ancient  apostolic  church,  but  he  has  not  kept  his 
word.  I  warrant  that  that  pledge  will  never  be  redeemed.  (Mr. 
Campbell  here  explained  that  he  had  fixed  it  at  the  16th  July,  1054.) 
If  then  the  Catholic  church  ceased  to  be  the  true  church  m  1054, 
where  was  the  churc,h  of  Christi  Where  was  the  true  Catholic  church, 
from  which  the  ifarniun  Catholic  church  separated  1  "Behold  lam 
ALWAYS  with  you,"  says  Christ,  "  and  I  will  send  you  moOMi  Parsp 
dete  who  will  abide  with  you  all  days."    Matth.  xxviii.  SO. 

If  the  true  church  vras  no  where—if  Christ  had  no  witness  on  earth, 
his  promises  have  failed ;  and  Revelation  is  a  solecism.  A  church, 
unless  it  be  conspicuous,  unless  every  enauirer  can  have  access  to  m 
is  of  no  use  as  a  witness  of  truth  to  mankind.  If  hid,  how  <»n  it 
testify  of  the  true  doctrine  of  Christ  to  all  nations  t  But  mark  ihe 
splendid  testimony  in  fevor  of  tiie  purity  and  watchfulness  of  the 
Roman  Catiiolic  church,  afforded  by  histonr.  How  did  tiie  schism 
of  the  Greek  church  begin  1  A  layman  Photius  intruded  and  de- 
dared  himself  tiie  head  of  tiie  church.  This  single  fact  is  a  splendid 
areument  of  itself,  to  prove  tiie  necessity  of  a  supreme  head  *©  watch 
over  the  church.  To  use  a  Scriptural  phrase,  he  vras  like  a  faitiifal 
sentinel  upon  the  walls  of  Zion,  to  sound  tiie  warning  to  ttie  world, 
or,  if  you  will,  not  to  resemble  "a  dumb  dog,"  but  to  bark  at  tiie  approach 
of  tiie  tiiief,  who  came  not  in  at  tiie  gate,  but  came  by  another  viray 
into  tiie  fold,and  he  did  bark  at  bun ;  and  PhoUus  and  Michael  Cera- 
larius  and  otiier  Greek  intrudere  and  errorists,  not  content  witii  as- 
Burning  a  power  not  belonging  to  them,  actually  cursed  and  anatiie- 
matisS  tiie  pope  of  Rome,  a  proof  pcriiaps  of  tiie  amiable  charactow 
tiie  sentleman  gives  tiie  enemies  of  order  and  of  the  pope,  hut  a  suf- 
ficient  reason  why  tiie  pope  should  exert  aU  his  authonty  m  protect- 
ing  the  church  from  their  usurpations.  ^^ 

But  the  three  legates  to  whom  the  commission  was  entrusted,  car- 
ried tiie  bull  of  excommunication  in  tiieir  pockets,  and  tiiey  are  made 
to  appear  very  treacherous  because  they  did  not  produce  it  at  once, 
but  Sed  by  pacific  measures  to  bring  about  a  reconciliation.  Is  it  in 
tiie  gentieman's  estimation,  then,  an  evidence  of  treachery,  to  resor*  ts 
persuasive  means  witii  an  enemy,  before  appealing  to  the  word  and 
involving  one's  country  in  war  1  Suppose  the  president  ot  the  Unitea 
States  sends  a  minister  to  a  foreign  country  to  obtaiu  tiie  settlement 


i%^ 


^  *^^*>^"fWiiiw>*    I>oet  that  mloistflr  besin  hj  declaring  war, 
hm  ibiMif  Ms  profwaal  with  a  bayonet  down  &e  tliroata  of  the  peo- 
ple to  wkoB  he  ia  aeeroditedl    No,  he  triee  eveij  auld  meaaa  fint. 
The  eeatiary  eomae  wonld  be  neither  politie  nor  wjae,  neither  homana 
Mr  in  aiseofdanee  with  the  mka  ef  eiviliaed  aoetetj.    The  great  and 
li»  peealiar  character  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  is  neither 
111  |iio¥oke  Mt  to  bnok  aipsMioik    If  her  righta  aie  violated,  she 
•ndiaviai  to  ecBviaer  the  ¥1018101  of  his  injnatiee^  to  diaabiiBe  him 
of  hiaemr,  to  win  fain  boeic  to  a  aenae  of  rectitade  by  peranaaion 
■Bd  imt  lemonatraiiBet    M  thia  lail%  iho  leaorto  to  anna,  and  though 
*o1ot«»  P«co  »be  18  pieparad  fot  war.    In  a  word  she  is  torribly 
pioafU*  flow  mark  the  eoorae  of  the  legatoa.  They  entreat  Michael 
to  loeonnider  hie  conduct,  they  urge  oviiy  argvment  that  aeal  can  sug 
geat,  but  finding  all  their  efforts  fhiitlesa,  they  afterwards  act  in  pur 
suance  of  their  inatructiona,  with  peiiwt  ingenuousness  and  opennesa 
Oboenre  their  procedure.    They  aacend  the  altar  of  the  great  chnich 
«f  St,  Sophia,  the  seventh  wonder  of  the  worlft— at  whoae  portals 
flood  that  laige  vaao  for  the  holy  water,  wherawith  Gieefca  and  Ro- 
flians,  conunemoraling  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  oi  Christ,  by  which 
oar  conscienoea  aro  pnriied  from  dead  works  to  servo  the  living  God, 
wore  aecuatomed  aUio  to  bieaa  themselvea ;  and  on  which  were  in> 
Mnbed  the  Greek  weida  ««N«9mvAf^^M^umi^^f«i4iy»  '« purify  O 
Ckid,  our  transonressioBa,  and  not  oor  countonance  only."    They  went 
on  the  altar  and  in  a  iamal  apoeeh  explained  to  the  asaembled  mahi- 
iuda  what  were  the  grounds  of  the  anathema.    The  crime  of  Mi- 
chaelwaa  that  in  deianoe  of  the  prohibitions  both  of  the  old  and  new 
f  *^»  ^  ™  "mmI*  eunncha  prieeta*    He  waa  alao  aoeuaed  of  Arian- 
ism.    Blow  the  Ariana  deny  the  divinity  of  Christ— I  have  heard 
iraiB  some  of  our  most  respectable  eitisens,  that  Mr.  Campbell  alao 
icnaa  that  cardinal  doama,  but  I  do  not  vouch  for  the  conectneaa  of 
tteif  aaoertlon.    (Ma.  C ampbbix  here  staled  that  he  did  not  deny  the 
divinity  of  Christ.)  ^ 

It  appe«a  pretty  plant  fiooi  history  that  the  people  wore  for  the 
— *-  -- ^  opposed  to  their  own  usurping  arehbiahmi.  Why  I    "  The 
lerodlhem."  But  how!  Solar  fiom  it  their  whole  argument 
^  .d  amdmi  a  man  liyiiig  amoogsi  thia  very  people,  and  for 

m  iniivMual  far  distant.  It  ia  natural  to  snppoee  that  the  people 
were  prejudiced  in  favor  of  their  owaaiohhiahopaBd  against  one  who 
waa  a  Strang  to  them.  In  abort,  weio  they  not  apeakmg  againat  the 
piBiaey  and  tho  aaaamplioaa  of  the  eeeleaiaatieal  dignitary  of  the 
verv  ohuf^  m  whieh  they  apohe,  andof  tho  very  people  to  whom  they 

ZS!:*  ♦C'*^-i9L*^  ^  •*"83r'  n«i  "flwy  ■tronrly  inveighed 
agatnat  the  nnaeiiplwal  and  lincanenical  ordination  of  tie  odioua  en- 

iincfes,by  wh«  thepatriarehwaa  eurio^  Thia  iraa  a  ine  U- 
lustration  of  the  leal  iW  sound  doctrine  and  diaetpline,  diaplayed  in 
^qg^P^?^  ^  iybae^ooiit  ago  kj  the  holy  aee.     ItlSaVting 

m  mm  apoitoiiB  mmtm It  m  holler  to  obey  God  than  man— .1^ 

intiea  are  ova  and  conaeqneneaa  are  God'a. 
"  Oh  TJinotlhr,  gu«d  die  dei^ 

-Now  the  tpwk  mmfettly  uMh  tbrnt  in  tli«  kat  tinet^  loae  ahall  deptrt 
iron  Uie  fiuth.  giving  becd  to  tpiriu  of  error,  ipeakiiig  Urn  in  hypocrwy ,  bMilar 

^^i^'^'^P^mm^  with  •  red  hot  iron.  ThSe  things  piSpoting  to  ihl 
bfethren  thou  ibtit  b«  a  •«~«  —;«;-*—  -./  i ol_:_*  JI^H.J:^  ^  ."^  ^r" 

wonit  of  the  fiuth  and  ol 

111  Ep.  to  Tia.  ch.  h.  w,  1 


od  «,iBiiitr 


BOMAH   CATHOLIC   mBMOION. 


18 


ThttS  on  this  occasion  did  the  pope.  «.»u„«»k  «f  r  ah. 

My  friend  could  not  understanJ  m  what  sense  *^«P«^"«°  jjjf  "• 
atandnople  claimed  the  title  of  universal  bishop;  and  w^mtod  to  l»ani 
how  his  claim  differed  from  the  pr^nt  underetimdwg  ^^^^  jfj^ 
Hehas  the  answer  in  this  history  of  facts.  He  has,  or  his  authonty 
bS  pSZfor  him.  admitted  that  this  Michael  had  said  m  effect  tha^ 
he  was  Lord  God  over  all  the  earth;  and  that  there  was  no  auAon^ 
without  his  sanction  for  any  officer  of  the  church  to  perform  any  M 
Se  oXances  of  relirion.  ^Eyen  the  pope  of  Ro™«  ™«f  ,«^^f  ^ 
his  feet  before  he  could  administer  the  eucharist  or  even  »>aotize  an 
Sfent    And  the  historian  says  that  the  document  accusing  die  areh- 

ES^p  was  read  before  the  people  of  ^-^^T^'^^^'^^e'^S 
when  he  leiirned,  where  he  was  known,  and  where  all  the  tacM  oi 
Se^^3^^fore  them.    What  i.  the  mo«  naturri  »»PS«»f  on  t 
Surely  this ;  that  if  that  docmnent  had  not  been  true  *e,Pf<T»« '»^ 
have  eried  out  against  it;-fl.ey  worfd  not  have  "f  »%^'^  ,£0 
^t  all  thia  is  a  Splendid  triumph  of  the  supremacy  of  Uie  B»^^ 'e*- 
Zt  why  refer  to  Particular  instance,  when  *cles.^t.ca^^^^^^ 
fall  of  anoeals  made  to  the  bishop  of  Rome  by  all  the  other  OMiiopa 
rf  christendm."nd  all  acquieseiig  in  hisd^irion  as  not  ojJy  *e  Je- 
c^on  of  Peter  but  of  Ch^t  himself.    "^'^S^^^XT^ 
■ion  riven  to  Paul,"  saya  Bosauet, «  «pifed  :^*.  >»»™  »  "^i^^ 
blen£ne  with  the  authority  of  Peter,  to  which  >»  7»?„»"''»^*5 
nised  fte  Boman  see  to  the  height  rf  authority  and  tM'^^ 
SeThureh  which,  taught  by  Peter  »f  »?»  ?"'*'*n^.,^^ 
infected  with  heresy.    This  power  of  binding  ?»d  1~«»«  fi»™  "^ 
was  riven  first  to  Peter  and  then  to  the  rest  of  the  twelve  apostles. 
Fo^ifw^ranifestly  the  design  of  Jesus  Christy  to  pl«>e  «>«»»■» 
wha  he  afterwards  fiitended  to  confer  °n  many,  but  Ae  sequel  un^ 
not  the  commencement,  nor  does  the  first  lose  »"f  .?>»?«•  Ji'  "^ 
the  same  power  from  the  same  source,  but  not  all  »"*''«.  ^,J*P*f' 
BOT  rSie  same  extent,  for  Jesus  Christ  "on^-J^cf**  JTSS  ifnif 
nlMma  and  alwavs  in  the  manner  best  calculated  toMtabliahtheum- 
g'H'e^hi^lI??    u Peter,"  says.  St.  A-gJ^^^n,  ^ho,  «  th^hon« 
oY  his  primacy,  represented  the  enure  chureb,  first  "*  "•'T' "^S?" 
the  kevs.  which  were  next  to  be  communicated  to  all  the  othere.    1  ho 
ts^KiSTsas.ignedby.St.C««iri«rfArl«|.tto^^^ 
authority,  first  established  in  a  single  bishop,  and  afterwards  di»uM« 

^Kli^nMn  Uparebly  nnit«l  \^'Tl^^-iJ^Xe^i^mh2 
*k«it  th«  phair  of  Peter  so  much  celebrated  by  the  Hathere,  m  wnien 
they  Vi^wiSo^  another  in  extolling  .he  principality  of  the  aportoljc 
Srthe  principal  principality,  the  source  of  ""'♦J'*?  »^" 
Snreh.  the  fcead  (^or  centre)  of  the  •?»?<?«?•''':''»"  P"^*^"'  "^ 
«,vemment,  the  chief,  the  only  see  whieh  bmde*  all »  «»•  V- 

In  these  words  you  hear  Ootatns,  St.  AngnsUn,  St.  Cypnan,  St. 
I»n«u8  It  Prospir,  St.  Avitus,  Theodore^  thecouncil  ofChalcedon, 
Kid  G^!^;Uc.  and  Aria,  the  e«t  »d  the  west  umj»d  «oj^ 
3i«  This  is  die  doctrine  of  all  the  church ;  this  is  its  unity  and 
S^isth  Here  all  is  strong  because  all  U  divine,  all  m  m.ited.  And 
r^hpS^  divine,  the'^bond  also  is  divine,  »*  *«  ""'»»„^ 
SrZSnL  auch  that  each  member  acts  wiU,  the  ^^^  "^  *«»2^ 
bo^r   Heooe  whUst  the  ancient  bishops  said,  they  exercised  antksi- 


44 


WiMBATM  cm  THE^ 


i 


^ly  in  tlieir  refpeetivo  cliiucket  ai  tiM  lieara  of  Smm  Chaht  and  sno* 
•tmon  of  the  a|iotilM  Mnl  immodiatelj  by  him,  th^  also  declared 
tliat  tliif  aoted  in  Ilia  name  of  Peter  in  firtne  of  the  anthori^  given  to 
all  blahopa  in  the  peraon  of  Peter ;  ao  that  the  conespondeiioe>  the 
union  ami  hannonv  of  the  entire  body  of  the  chnrch  are  such  that  what 
one  btahop  doea,  id  aeoordanoe  with  the  apirit  and  ralea  of  Catholic 
nnity,  all  the  church,  all  the  Eptacopaey,  aiid  tha  chief  of  the  Epiaco- 
pacy  act  io  concert  and  accompliah  with  him. 

My  Mead  obaerfea  that  the  Oraaka  were  alwaya  nneaay  under  the 
Human  popedom.  I  admit  thia  to  a  ^[reat  eitent,  but  St.  John,  and 
Myeaiii,  and  Ignatiua  and  Irensua  (hia  name  aignifiea  Peace,  or  the 
Mieailil)  and  Euaebiua  and  Chrysostom  and  a  hundred  othere  were 
iSreeka,  and  the  moat  eloquent  advocatea,  and  the  ablest  supporters  of 
the  preeminence  of  the  chnrch  of  Rome  aboTC  all  other  chnrchea. 

Here  then  is  a  cloud  of  witneaaea  who  furnish  an  aatoniahing  maaa 
of  teatimony  to  the  fact  that  in  the  early  daya,  the  Greek  chuich  aa 
wM  m  the  Latin  eubmitted  willingly  to  the  authority  of  St.  Peter  and 
anccesaors— the  authority  neoeaaary  to  preserve  order  and  peaca 
unity,  lie.  in  the  church  of  God  on  earth. 

With  regard  to  the  controveray  of  the  sentleman  with  Bishop  Otey ; 
than  wia  a  mooted  point  between  Mr.  Campbell  and  himself.  I  un* 
dentiMid  however  that  all  the  diaeoaaion  was  on  Mr.  Campbell'a  side. 

(Mb.  CAMPaaiA  here  eiplained  that  he  had  had  a  private  discusaion 
wnm  Biakop  Otey,  and  had  afterwards  written  him  seven  letters  upon 
the  Bpiacopaey.) 

Bmbop  PtmcBu..  I  really  do  not  know  what  Mr.  CampbelPa  teneta 
■re,  or  what  he  believea.  My  brethren,  I  am  fighting  in  the  dark.  I  am 
obliged  In  answer  on  the  apot  chargea  and  objectiona  against  my  re- 
IgiMi  wiich  I  cannot  anticipate,  while  I  really  know  not  what  my 
■■ligiMiit'a  belief  is,  what  qualifications,  what  marks  of  a  divine  call 
to  the  ministry  he  considers  necessary,  if  indeed  he  believes  in  any 
peculiar  aeparation  of  any  man  or  act  of  men,  for  prieatly  functions. 

Will  mjf  friend  aay  definitely,  before  thia  assembly,  if  he  believe  in 
the  neoeaaity  of  aueh  call  or  miaaion. 

Ma.  CampbHiIm  I  do* 

BieiiQr  PuBciLL.  How  ia  that  calling  made  known,  that  mission 


Ma.  CiKPitLL.  By  the  woid  and  providence  of  God. 

Bnaop  PuMsiu..  How  can  we  aacartain  that  word  and  providence 
of  God! 

Mb.  Campbell.  By  tha  voice  of  the  people  and  tha  wiitten  word— 
•«  vox  popnli  vox  Dei." 

B18HOP  PimcBLL.  Snppoaa  tha  people  are  diapleaaed,  for  inatance, 
with  a  Presbyterian  naator,  have  may  the  aole  power  to  remove  him  I 

Mr.  Campbell.  Yea. 

Bishop  Purcbll.  Suppoae  the  mioistnr  of  a  Preabyterian  church 
are  diaiilaaaed  with  him,  and  the  people  oi'^his  church  are  pleased  with 
him.    May  he  then  retain  hia  atation  againat  the  will  of  the  ministry  I 

Mr.  Campbbll.  If  the  people  will  have  it  ao,  it  muat  be  ao.  ^  Vox 
mmmM,  v«ox  Dei"! 

liaMP  i%BCBLL.  There  my  brethren,  you  have  haaid  Mm!  Socli 
deolantiona! 


BOMAH   CATHOLIC   KELIOION. 


4ft 


SATURDAY,  Januabi  14th.,  Half  past  9  o'clock, 


Mb.  Campbell  riaei— 

I  shall  resume  the  subject  where  I  cloeed  yesterday  evening,  reserv- 
ing  my  remarks  on  the  last  speech  of  my  opponent  till  the  conclnaion 
oifiny  present  argument. 

The  gentleman  read  in  the  various  reasons  assigned  for  the  boll  of 
Nicholas,  against  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople  and  hia  brethren, 
among  others,  the  statement  that  the  Greeks  pretended  to  be  the  only 
true,  catholic  and  apostolic  church.  It  would  not  be  difficult  to  prova 
fipom  history  that  in  point  of  seniority,  the  Greek  church  has  a  auperior 
claim  to  the  Roman.  It  ia  firat  in  point  of  time,  and  claims  a  regular 
descent  from  the  apostles.  There  is  one  strong  argument  in  her  favor 
which  never  has  been  met.  To  her  belong  the  first  seven  councils. 
They  were  held  in  Grecian  cities,  called  by  Grecian  emperora,  and 
composed  of  Grecian  bishops.  They  were  wholly  Grecian.  The  Ro- 
man church  has  no  right  to  claim  them.  And  if  the  doctrines  proclaim- 
ed by  these  councils  be  true,  they  are  the  doctrines  of  the  Greek  chuich 
Bubsequently  borrowed  by  the  Romans. 

Aa  this  is  an  important  point,  I  will  expatiate  a  little  more  fully  up- 
on it.  I  have  taken  the  trouble  to  collect  the  following  facts :  at  tha 
jint  council  of  Nice  there  were  318  bishops :  of  these  316  were  Greek 
and  3  Roman.  This  was  the  first  genenu  council,  A.  D.336.  At  the 
first  council  of  Constantinople,  (the  tecond  general  council  of  the 
chuich.)  A.  D.  381.  there  were  150  bishops ;  of  these  149  were  Gieeka, 
and  only  1  was  Roman.  At  the  third  council  held  at  Cphesus,  A.  DU 
431,  there  were  but  68  bishops  present.  Of  these  67  were  Greek,  and 
one  was  Roman.  At  the/o«WA  general  council,  which  was  the  largest 
and  most  authoritative  of  the  first  four,  held  at  Chalcedon  A.  D.  451, 
against  Eutyches,  there  were  present  353  bishops :  350  of  whom  were 
Greeks,  and  only  3  Roman.  At  the  second  council  of  Constantinopla 
{thej^  general  council)  there  were  present  164  bishops:  156  of 
whom  were  Greeks,  and  6  Romans — held  a^nst  Origan  and  othera, 
A.  D.  553.  At  the  third  council  of  Conatantmople,  (and  the  rizth  gen- 
eral council,)  there  were  56  bishops  present :  61  of  whom  were  Greeks, 
and  5  Romans.  This  council  met  against  the  Monothelites  A.  D  680. 
At  the  second  council  of  Nice,  (the  seventh  general  council,)  there 
were  present  377  bishops;  370  of  whom  were  Greeks,  and  7  Romana. 
They  met  to  restore  images,  A.  D.  787.  These  were  the  firtt  aeoen 
general  eo»fiet/f  of  the  church.  I  have  been  at  the  paina  to  make  thia 
collection  of  facta,  to  ascertain  the  merita  of  the  controverey  between 
tin  Greek  and  Roman  aecta,  aa  respects  the  (question  to  whom  of 
right  belong  the  doctrines  of  the  ancient  councila.  I  find  that  tha 
wnole  number  of  bishops  in  these  councils  was  1486 :  only  26  of 
whom  were  Romans.  Certainly  the  Greek  church  has  the  prior  claim 
on  our  attention,  and  ought  to  be  revered  for  her  antiouity  and  autho^ 
iiy,  more  than  the  schism  which  haughtily  separated  from  her ! 

But,  in  addition  to  these  councils  having  been  called — ^not  by  tha 
authority  of  the  chuich  of  Rome:  but  by  eastern  emperors,  and  com- 

Jioeed  of  eastern  bishops;  evenr  great  question  discussed  in  the  firet 
bur.f  and,  indeed,  I  may  add,  m  the  last  three  councils,  waa  of  Gre- 


«iaB  oiigii.  They  mw  up  in  tlie  Greek  school— t  icliool  wtUy  dlt- 
infiislieil  iroiii  the  Latii,  by  the  peculitr  iubtiliy  of  its  definitions— 
m  school  long  neenstonied  to  nice  distinctions,  and  whose  reasoners 
could  split  the  thousandth  part  of  in  iden.  Of  this,  their  wars  about 
kommmm  and  hmmmmm  are  ample  proof.  There  are  no  queationii 
mote  pwwly  abstnel  and  OMtaphysieal  than  many  of  those  discnssed 
in  these  set  en  great  eenmenicsl  coonolls. 

AffBltt,  these  councils  were  not  only  called  by  Greeks,  composed  of 
Qnelnt  and  occnpied  about  Greek  qiestions ;  but  were  all  assemUed 
In  Greeinn  eitlee* 

If  there  be  any  Tirtne  in  councils  to  establish  doetrues  and  the  pnor 
ity  ef  ehvelies,  the  Greek  church  most  be  considered  the  mother  of 
tlie  MoBini,  rether  than  her  daughter.  At  all  events,  it  is  fully  proted 
thattlie  lemnn  Catholic  chnreh  is  a  sect  or  schism,  which  is  the  bur- 
Umi  of  tin  pnpoaition  before  us.  To  strengthen  this  conviction,  I 
ptoeeed  to  eommenton  a  standard  definition  of  Catholicity. 

I  would  now  ask  if  there  be  any  objeetion  to  the  book  which  I  hold  hi 
ny  hand,  as  a  good  Roman  Catholic  authority.  I  belicTe  it  to  be  the 
tPM  standard  of  the  Roman  Catholic  chnreh.  It  is  •<  the  dodrine  if 
mmm€atfl^mt,mmrmedimike€mii(popePimihevrJ**  Bnl 
while  the  word  '^cathofic**  Is  in  my  eve,  I  am  reminded  that  my 
Hieni  has  aasefted,  •  that  eatkoUe  is  a  scripture  Utle  of  the  chnreh.*  I 
reply  that  it  is  not  so  used  in  the  New  Testament;  and  that  it  is  onlj 
Ibund  as  a  fleneral,  mnning  title  to  some  epistles :  that  its  antiquity  is 
very  donbt&l,  as  it  eannot  be  found  In  the  body  of  the  book ;  and,  con- 
■eqnentty*  it  has  no  authority.  But  now  for  the  definition  from  the 
■piiroTed  standard  of  the  chnreh : 

S«€Htm  IV.  Under  th«  h«Ml,  **  TImi  tktehtrch  ^  Ckriti  u  Cathouc  mt 
UinTBmsAf^**  it  It  wkod, 

Whmi  do  you  mtdenkmdby  tkh  f 

JiMwer.  *  Not  onlj  that  tb«  church  of  Christ  ihali  arar^jt  be  known  by  the 
name  of  Catholic,  bj  which  the  ii  called  in  the  creed;  bat  that  fhe  shall  abo 
be  tra^  CTatholie  or  Univanal  bj  being  the  church  of  all  ages  and  nations.** 

Wo  have  been  slmwinff  that  the  chnreh  of  Christ  was  not  orlginalli 
iMiPn  by  the  name  MfiMiei  that  the  Roman  sect  was  not  the  chnrob 
«f  tiM  imt  six  centuries ;  and,  therelbre,  that  the  approved  definition 
of  tho  efsed  will  not  apply  to  this  pnrtr.  I  have  proved  that  she  had 
•o  pope,  or  supreme  liead,  for  foil  six  hundred  years,  and  in  conobom 
Hsu  of  the  niguaoott  drewn  from  general  councils,  I  have  shown  that 
iM  first  seven  wore  sot  here,  bnl  peooliarly  thoee  of  the  Greek  chnrehi 
and  that  the  Greek  chnreh  is,  in  met,  the  mother. 


Greek  than  the  Roman,  needs  not  be  slatsd  but  for  a  few.  One  proof 
of  this  feet  is,  thnt  the  Hebrew  has  given  many  words  to  the  Greek, 

while  the  Greek  has  given  none  In  the  Hebrew  So  the  Greek  has 
siven  mony  words  to  the  Latin,  while  the  Latin  has  given  none  to  the 
Greek.  Thus  we  prove  the  Roman  chureh  to  have  come  out  of  tho 
bosom  of  the  Greek,  from  the  fact,  that  all  the  leading  ecclesiastical 
tarais  in  tho  Roman  ohnrch  are  Greek.  For  example :  "/x>pe,"  ^^pairi' 
■mr9h,*\^^mod**  *^eeekmat^"  "seAum,"  "aeAtffmalic/'  ^^hereajf"  "A«fis> 
Ue^"  "  ker€9iaireAf"  "  ca^ctcAumtfrt,"  ^^  hierorehy"  "cAurehj"  "chrim^/* 


XOIIAX  CATBOUC   BUJOION. 


i«, 


^hnystk,^  "cattoAc,"'  ^*carum,^^  &c.,  dec.,  &c.  This  as  folly  prove! 
the  seaiority  of  the  Greek  chureh,  as  it  does  that  of  the  Greek  lan- 
guage over  the  Latin. 

All  ancient  ecclesiastical  historians,  are  also  Greeks,  such  as  Euso- 
bins.  Secretes  Scholasticus,  fivagrius  Schdasticus,  Sozomon,  Theo- 
doret.  The  most  ancient  and  primitive  fathere  are  also  Greek.  They 
were  models  to  the  Latins  and  imitated  in  their  writings. 

To  recapitulate,  we  have  now  shown  that  the  Greek  church  is  more 
ancient  Uian  the  Latin  church ;  because  the  first  seven  general  councils 
were  all  Greek,  there  being  1486  Grecian  bishops  and  onlv  26  Roman 
biahops  present,  they  were  called  by  Greek  emperora,  held  in  Greek 
cities,  and  employed  about  Greek  questions. 

The  leading  ecclesiastic  terms  of  all  the  ancient  offices,  customs 
and  controversies,  are  Greek  :  So  are  the  early  fathera  and  historians. 

These  considerations  superadded  to  the  facts  and  documents  of  yes^ 
terday,  we  think  fully  prove  that  the  Roman  church  is  not  the  chureh 
of  all  ages  and  of  all  nations — ^notthe  catholic  and  apostolic  church,  at 
theereedof  Trent  defines;  but  a  tec/,  a  branch  or  schism, from  tbo 
Hebrew  and  Greek  churches  of  the  New  Testament. 

In  proving  the  proposition  before  us  my  plan  is  to  select  one  of  tho 
grand  elements  embraced  in  the  standard  definition  of  ihe  chureh,  and 
to  show  that  such  being  essentia  to  the  church,  the  church  could  not 
exist  witiiout  it.  Now,  I  prefer  the  arithmetical  mode  of  procedure  in 
this  discussion.  Firet  lay  down  the  rule  and  work  a  single  questioBf 
and  then  leave  it  to  othera  to  work  as  many  as  they  please. 

Thus  I  first  laid  down  a  definition  of  the  Roman  Catholic  chnrA 
from  her  own  standards.  From  that  it  appeared  that  a  pope  or  univefi- 
Md  bishop  is  an  euenlial  element  of  her  existence.  I  then  showed  that 
six  hundred  yeare  had  elapsed  from  the  time  of  the  apostles,  before  tho 
doctrine  or  existence  of  a  nniTersal  bishop  was  thought  of,  and  that  tho 
office  vras  not  instituted  till  the  year  606.  But  when  I  have  proved 
this,  I  have  worked  only  one  question.  Any  one  may  take  up  the  doo- 
trine  of  trensubstantiation,  the  worship  of  images,  purgatory,  (a  doo- 
trine  more  ancient  however,  than  either  the  Greek  or  Roman  church,) 
nnd  every  other  peculiar  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  and 
prove  that  not  one  of  them  is  to  be  found  in  the  divine  book,  nor  in  tho 
records  of  the  church. 

What,  let  me  now  ask,  is  the  great  point  in  my  first  proposition  t 
To  prove  that  the  Roman  Catholic  church  is  not  "  the  mtmer  and  mtt- 
Iras*'  of  all  churches ;  but  a  ieeU  i°  the  foil  import  of  that  word;  and 
if  tet  be  not  now  proved,  I  Imow  not  what  can  be  proved.  I  admit 
the  subject  is  capable  of  much  more  extensive  developement ;  but  wo 
think  it  neidier  necessary  nor  expedient  to  be  more  diffuse. 

Will  the  presiding  moderator  please  read  my  fint  proposition  1 

(Here  proposition  No.  1.  was  read  by  the  moderator,  j 
say  then  she  is  not  the  Ao/y,  twottoke,  eatholie  church,  as  she  pro* 
tends  to  be ;  for  in  proving  her  to  be  a  teeU  I  prove  her  to  be  notetMm 
Hct  nor  apoitolic ;  because  the  true  apostolic  church  cannot  be  called  n 
met.  To  prove  her  to  be  a  sect  is  to  prove  her  not  Catholic,  therefore, 
nor  apostolic.  What  remains  nowt  Even  on  the  concession  of  my 
opponent,  she  is  not  the  CaihoHe  church ;  for  he  admits,  that  the  Greek 
thureh  di^red  from  her  only  in  a  few  non-essential  matters.    On  that 


WMBATM  ON  TUB 

admitsiiNi,  if  lie  •inilti  Himt  peitont  m  wTed  in  jOw  Greek  dmieii  { 
■be  mutt  1m  a  duI  of  ikm  ehmeh  of  Cbftst ;  for  with  him,  tbeie  ie  oc 
•dvatioii  out  or  theelmfeh. 

Im  the  next  plaee  my  vropocitlon  iiye  '  ehe  ia  not  hofyJ  I  am  im- 
pelled lij  a  aense  of  doty,  and  not  by  any  unkind  feelings  towards  such 
of  my  fellow  citiieas  as  belong  to  ^toommont^,  to  attemnt  to  prore 
Ihal  the  church  of  Rome  ia  not  holy.  I  would  not  heedlessly  or  need- 
ieealy  oiend  aj[ainst  the  feelings  of  an  Indian,  a  Hindoo,  or  a  Pamn, 
in  his  aincero  devoaons,  how  absnid  aooTer  they  might  be.  Much  less 
would  I  wound  any  one  that  professes  the  christian  religion  under  anj 
form;  but  in  aerring  my  contemporaries,  in  redeemingr  my  pledj^  1^ 
has  become  necessary  to  investigate  the  jmnd  metensions  of  thu  fira 
tetnity,  that  exdnsiTelT  arrogates  to  itaelf  the  tide  of  Ao^. 

Mot  to  expatiate  at  Ifaia  time  on  the  vices  of  the  clergy  and  of  the  nopet 
what  the  cardinals  Barronioa  and  Bellarmine  have  so  fully  noticed,  and 
sometimes  specially  detailed,  I  shall  take  a  single  text  from  Bellar^ 
mine,  De.  Bccl.  lib.  3.  c  7.  which  avows  a  doctrine  thstt  must  for 
ever  make  the  Roman  church  unholy.     It  is  expressed  in   these 

words  :^ 

•*  Wicked  men,  inftdelt  and  reprobatet  remaining  in  the  public  profetiion  of 
the  Romifh  church  are  Im*  memben  of  the  body  of  Chri«t.  ' 

How  then  can  we  admit  that  ahe  ia  holy  !  Again  :  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  the  great  mass  of  all  thoee  who  die  in  the  faith  and  profes* 
eion  of  the  Catholic  doctrines  are  not  strictly  holy ;  for  why  then  should 
thsf  have  to  pasa  through  the  fires  of  purgatory  I 

But  again ;  in  her  own  Testament  (if  she  have  a  Testament.    The 

rtieman  may,  indeed  tell  us  his  church  has  no  English  Testament ; 
she  never  owned  hot  the  Vulgate.  She  never  gave  to  her  people, 
with  approbation  a  French,  or  English,  or  any  vernacular  Testament. 
The  Rhemish  Testament  is,  however,  published  by  the  anthority  of  a 
portion  of  the  chuich ;  and  from  it  we  can  find  the  doctrine  of  Bellap> 
vine  explicitly  taught  in  the  notes  appended,  by  the  same  authority 
w blah  gave  the  Testament)  in  ker  oum  Tatamenif  I  repeat  it,  on  John 
XV.  1.  these  Roman  annotatora  say  :«• 


KOXAN   CATHOLIC    SBLIOIOK. 


49 


•*  j;v«ry  ftfwneJk  m  AM.  Ac.**    Chritt  hath  aone  hrancbet  in  hit  bodv  i  , 
that  be  fmitleM;  therolbffe,  ill  livers  alto  insj  he  menbert  of  ChriiC*i  cbertkr 

"  111  Kvmi^  (mark  it)  ••  mmj  be  membera."  This  is  repeatedly  sta- 
ted  in  varioua  places,  and  as  I  understand,  avowed  by  all  that  commn- 
nity,  as  the  tme  doctrine  of  the  church.  **  111  /iwen,"  wicked  men,  in- 
lidela,  leprobates,  vieiona  charactera,  those  guiltj  of  crimes  of  every 
enonntty  and  color,  may  then  continue  memberb  of  the  Roman  church, 
while  tim  acknowledge  the  pope  and  the  priesthood,  and  make  profee- 
ilea  of  fittth  in  the  Catholic  church ;  ahe  therefore  counts  within  bet 
iild  IHMNIO^OOO  of  aonls,  as  my  opponent  stated  in  this  city  in  October 
last.  M  thai  happen  to  be  bom  in  Catholic  coontriea,  infidels,  athe* 
ist%  and  all,  are  enrolled  in  her  eommnnion.  Her  ffatea  are  wide  aa 
me  Inman  raee.  It  ia  all  church  and  no  worid  with  her.  The  lusts  of 
tie  flesh,  the  last  of  the  eyes,  and  the  pride  of  life,  are  found  in  her 
communion. 

The  Roman  Catholics  in  the  United  States  are  probably  the  best  body 
of  Catholica  in  the  world.  I  mean  those  who  are  native  cttixens.  But 
visil  Old  Spain  or  New  Spain,  Portugal,  Italy,  Austria,  France,  or  Can- 
ada, where  Catholicism  is  the  established  religion ;  and  then  ask  whe- 
ther hotiaeaa  be  a  distingoiahing  attribute  of  the  depraved  and  degraded 


millions  who  call  tfiemselves  Roman  Catholics!  This  with  me  la  no 
vary  pleasant  theme,  and  I  will  not  extend  my  remarks  on  this  point  by 
unnecessary  detaihi.  I  have  aaid  enough  to  prove  the  allegata  is  my 
first  proposition,  and  to  show  that  the  church  of  Rome  m  a  mc<  and  not 
the  holy,  apostolic  church  of  Christ,  as  she  proudly  and  exclnsifely 
pretends.  I  am  willing  to  submit  these  documents  to"  the  severest  ii^ 
vestigation ;  and  if  other  arguments  and  facts  are  called  for,  I  will  oaljr 
add,  we  have  them  at  command. 

My  learned  opponent  seems  to  imagine  that  when  I  fix  the  birtfi  inf 
©f  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  on  the  16th  day  of  July  1054,  I  must 
admit  that  the  chnroh  from  which  she  tcparated  was  the  true  and  nneoi^ 
rupted  church  of  Christ ;  but  this  is  what  logicians  call  a  non  ieqmimr. 
It  does  not  follow.  The  gentleman  seems  to  reason  a»  if  it  were  inva- 
riable that  when  one  sect  separates  from  another,  the  bodj  from  which 
it  separates,  must  necessarily  be  the  true  church.  Tliis  is  not  logical. 
A  new  sect  may  spring  from  the  bosom  of  the  worst  sect  on  earA ; 
but  does  this  prove  that  the  mother  sect  has  piety,  character,  or  author- 
ity !  Neither  does  it  follow  that  in  the  year  1054  the  Gfeck  church, 
though  the  mother  or  sister  of  the  Roman,  was  the  true  church  of  Christ. 
When  it  becomes  necessary,  I  may  show  that  both  the  Greek  and  Ro- 
man schisms  had  long  before  1054,  been  separate  from  the  apostolic 

church.  •  J    ^ 

Protestants  have  all  conceded  too  much  m  every  age  and  penod  of 
this  controversy.  Even  now  there  is  a  morbid  sensibility  upon  this 
Bubject  among  some,  lest  we  should  make  Christ's  church  too  indepen- 
dent of  the  pope's  chuich.  *  In  reproaching  the  mother  church,*  say 
they,  **  you  reproach  us,  also." 

In  one  of  the  periodicals  of  this  mornmg  it  was  intimated  that  th^ 
fates  and  fortunes  of  some  Protesiant  party  arc  involved  in  the  pending 
conuoversy.  Be  not  afraid  of  the  insinuations  of  such  political  alarm- 
ists. I  stand  here  as  a  Protestant,  not  as  a  Baptist,  or  Methodist,  or 
Episcopalian  ;  but  to  defend  Protestantism.  I  am  not  afraid  to  naeet 
any  antagonist  on  these  premises.  In  advocating  the  great  cardinal 
principles  of  Protestantism,  I  feel  that  I  stand  upon  a  rock.  There  is 
nothin«r  in  haxard.  I  am  sorry  to  see  this  sort  of  sensibility  manifest- 
ed. Can  the  truth  suffer  from  discussion  I  . .  .  .^ 
In  the  mean  time  I  will  proceed  to  the  second  proposition,  which  wiR 
much  illustrate  and  confirm  the  argument  already  offered  in  proof  of 
the  first.  These  great  points  so  embrace  one  another,  and  are  so  in- 
timately allied,  that  none  of  them  can  be  fully  demonstrated  without  re- 
ference to  the  others. 

•*  Piw*.  IL  Her  notion  of  Apottoltc  Soccevtion  it  without  any  foundation  If 
th«  Bible,  in  reason,  or  in  &ct ;  an  imposition  of  the  mott  injanous  coiuequen- 
ces,  built  upon  anscriptural  and  anti-scriptural  traditions,  resting  wholly  upon 
the  opinions  of  interested  and  Mlible  men." 

Before  I  heard  that  the  bishop  intended  to  meet  me  in  debate,  I  had 
tesolved  to  deliver  a  series  of  lectures,  on  the  whole  pretensions  of  the 
Roman  Church,  in  the  following  order :  1st  her  apostolicity,  2nd  anti- 
quity, 3rd  infallibility,  4th  supremacy,  5th  catholici^,  6th  unity, 
and  7th  sanctity.  These  seven  great  topics,  I  intended  to  discuss  ef 
full  length.  Each  involving  the  others,  none  of  them  is  so  isolatedat 
to  be  susceptible  of  an  independent  and  separate  developement.  The 
very  term  apottolidty  involves  antiquity:  hence,  we  find  her  pretending 
B  4 


m 


.MBATE  ON   TH"E 


SOMAN   CATHOLIC    MBLIGION. 


51 


to  tnicpiilitf  J^wtnt,  by  regular  iteiMit  back  to  Peteri  wkOf  ilio  asserttt 
wat  tlio  iial  Maliop  or  Rome. 

**  Onljr  thoM  that  ciw  derive  their  linenge  fron  tlie  spottles  are  the  heira  of  tha 

3ottIes:  and  conscquentlj  thfj  alone  can  rtaim  a  ri|^nt  to  the  scriT}(ares,  to  the 
mtniitratioB  of  the  lacrtroentf,  or  anj  ibarc  in  the  pastoral  mini-ftrf.  It  it 
tltfirpRMMrinharitaaoa  which  thf'y  have  tecelved  from  the  apoRtiet,  and  the 
■pttitltii  inm  Chriil  *  As  nir  fiither  hath  tent  me,  even  lo  I  mod  joa.'  **  Jobs 
EX.  21.    [Groundi  of  Cath.  Doc.  p.  17. 

Tliia  is  the  ioetrine  of  the  eraed  of  pope  Pius  it.  and  a  more  grlaring 
ptiiUii|itkMi  is  not  easily  imagtaed.  This  church,  however,  delights 
Id  assomptioii.  She  assumes  that  Jesus  Christ  did  establish  a  church 
of  all  nationSf  to  be  ruled  by  a  sort  of  generalissimo,  or  universal 
Ifil,  who  was  to  be  his  vicar  on  earth ;  by  virtue  of  whose  ecclesi- 
aaieal  poirer  she  assumes  for  him  political  power;  for  his  loj^e  is. 
that  Jesiis  Christ's  vicar  roost  rej^iesent  his  master  in  all  things,  in  his 
folilioal  as  well  as  hia  ecclesiastical  power.  And  as  Christ  himself 
pfiSiiSits  all  authority  in  heaven  and!  on  earth,  she  assumes  that  the 
Mipo  his  vicar  ought  to  be  the  fountain  of  all  power :  that  by  him 
sings  should  rei|{n,  and  princes  decree  justice.  After  having  thus  as* 
snmed,  that  Christ  did  establish  such  aicingdoraand  headship  on  earth, 
thpl  ho  did  constitute  the  office  of  a  vicar  for  himself  and  of  a  prince  of 
Ihompostles  ;  iu  the  second  place,  she  assumes  that  this  headship  was 
given  to  Peter,  that  Christ  gave  the  whole  church  and  the  apostles 
ibniselves  in  eharge  to  Peter ;  that  he  gave  him  absolute  control  over 
the  bishops,  pastors  and  laity ;  and  in  the  third  place,  to  complete 
the  climax  of  assumptions,  she  assumes  that  Christ  established  a  suc- 
oessorsbip  to  Peter  throughout  all  ages.  On  tMs  triple  assumption 
rests  the  colosaal  empire  of  the  papacy. 

Now,  as  to  the  nature  of  the  apostolieal  office  be  it  observed  with 
brevity,  that  it  was  essentially  incommunicable.  Holv  writ  recogni- 
w§B  but  three  orders  of  apostles,  and  none  of  them  had  lineal  succas- 
•ors.  Jesus  Christ,  the  apostle  of  God  the  Father,  was  the^«^.  He 
is  failed  in  Ihe  New  Testament,  ^ike  4fmtk  and  high  priest  of  the 
ohristian  pioihssion.**  It  is  not  necessary  to  prove  that  he  could  have 
00  successor.  Seamd,  the  twelve  apostles,  who  were  apostles  of 
Christ,  as  he  was  the  sposlle  of  God.  In  John  xvii.  he  says,  "As  my 
9kiker  made  me  his  apostle,  so  I  mahe  you  my  apostles.**  These  then 
Ifiog  personal  attendants  on  the  Messiah,  could  have  no  successors. 
TMrdf  Apostles  sent  out  birparticolar  churches,  on  special  errands. 
These  are  ealled  in  the  New  Testament  m  mmwrtui  rm  tMMkMnm.  These, 
always  sent  on  special  errands,  could  have  no  successors. 

If  the  qualifications  of  the  apostolic  office  were  understood,  there 
eould  be  no  controversy  on  the  question  of  successors.  As  laid 
down  by  Peter,  Acts  i.  it  behoved  them  to  have  been  companions  of 
Christ  Irom  his  baptism  to  his  acseusloo,  to  be  eye  and  ear  witnesses 
of  all  that  he  did  and  said.  In  this  essential  requisite  they  could  have 
■o  soocessors.  Besides,  if  one  should  have  a  successor,  why  not  aJlf 
While  the  college  of  apostles  was  necessary,  we  see  that  succession 
«S8  fiiUy  carried  out.  Thertsfore,  the  chair  of  Judas  the  traitor  deman« 
dod  a  soeeessor  as  well  as  that  of  Peter.  But  yet  we  have  not  heard 
of  any  controversy  about  the  successor  cf  Judas! 

Our  first  argnioent  against  the  Catholic  notion  of  succession  is  drawn 

the  f  sture  of  iiiti  »postoiic  office. 
Hit  did  we  concede  that  the  apostolic  office  was  communicable,  and 


that  Christ  did  appoint  a  president  of  the  apostles,  and  place  his  chair 
in  Rome,  there  is  no  document  on  earth,  from  which  we  can  lean  with 
any  degree  of  certainty,  that  Peter  was  ever  bishop  in  Rome.  And  yet 
Catholics  themselves,  contend  that  it  is  essential  to  the  cause  of  the 
•uccossion  and  supremacy  that  Peter  placed  his  see  at  Rome  by  Christ's 
commandment. 

Bellarmine  positively  affirms ; 

••  The  right  of  succession  in  the  popeto/Fome  is  founded  in  tMs,  that  Peter 
hy  Christ's  appointment,  placed  his  seat  at  Rome,  and  there  remained  tiU  hi* 
Mhr    Lib.  II.  c.  1.  .  ..         r  r    *      • 

This  resolves  the  controversy  into  n  single  question  of  fact,  viz. 
JHd  Peter,  by  Chri^s  appoifdment^  place  hi*  teal  ai  Borne  and  there  re- 
main  till  death  ?    Barronius,  however  says ;  ^    ..     „ 

"  It  is  not  improbable  that  our  Lord  gave  an  express  command  that  Peter 
•hould  to  fix  hi*  see  at  Rome,  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  should  abM>luteljr  sue 
ceed  hiin.     [Id.  lb.  .  *  »      v 

Only  probable !  But  there  is  no  such  succession  tnfaet.  In  the 
first  place,  there  is  no  proof  from  scripture  that  Peter  ever  was  at  Rome, 
much  less,  bishop  of  Rome ;  and  secondly,  if  he  were  an  apostle,  he 
eould  not  be  the  bishop  of  any  church.  A  king,  a  justice  of  the  peace. 
Hie  bishop  of  London,  the  vicar  of  Bray  !  It  is,  on  these  premises, 
impossible  to  prove  this  most  fundamental  question. 

Various  efforts  have  been  made  by  the  bishop  of  Cincinnati  to  ex- 
cite Episcopalians  and  others  on  this  question,  as  if  they  were  likely 
to  be  involved  in  the  same  common  ruin  with  my  opponent's  preten- 
bions.  There  is  no  need  for  any  alarm  on  this  account.  The  office  of 
pope  and  his  succession,  certainly,  are  not  identical  with  that  of 
Episcopalian  bishops  in  England  or  America  !  «     ,.  . 

There  is  no  body  cf  men  who  have  done  more  to  elevate  English 
Jterature  and  science,  than  the  English  clergy,  none  whose  writings 
I  have  read  with  more  pleasure  than  theirs,  on  all  subjects  pertaining 
to  general  literature,  morality  and  religion.  In  some  of  them,  indeed, 
we  find  weak  as  well  as  strong  places,  and  a  too  great  timidity  in 
contending  against  the  Romanists,  lest  they  should  endanger  their  right 
of  Episcopacy.  I  incline  to  the  opinion,  that  the  pretensions  of  the 
church  of  Rome  may  be  fully  canvassed  without  at  all  jeopardixing 
the  simple  quesUon  of  the  divine  right  of  Episcopacy.  But  if  we  at- 
tempt to  bring  a  clean  thing  out  of  an  unclean  ;  or  expect  to  find  a  di- 
vine warrant  in  the  commission  given  to  the  apostles ;  or  in  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  traditions  ;  we  shall  never  find  it  to  the  day  of  eternity. 

Successors  must  be  successors  in  full,  or  they  are  not  successors  at 
all.  To  illustrate  this — does  not  the  existing  president  of  the  United 
States  inherit  all  the  power  and  authority  of  George  Washington,  by 
virtue  of  constitutional  succession  1  Does  he  not  possess  the  same 
oower,  in  all  its  length  and  breadth,  its  height  and  depth,  as  dii  his 
predecessor,  from  the  first  to  the  last  1  This  is  true  of  every  constitu- 
tional office  in  the  civilized  world.  All  the  power  which  any  prede- 
cessor  can  have,  belongs  to  every  incumbent :  So  in  the  church.  *i  it 
have  constitution  at  all. 

If  the  apostles  have  successors,  they  have  successors  m  full.  But 
the  Roman  Catholics  themselves  give  up  the  controversy,  by  admitting 
that  none  of  the  bishops  or  popes  inherit  the  power  and  functions  be- 
stowed upon  the  apostles  by  the  commission.  -  , .  , 

I  do  not,  indeed,  found  my  argument  for  the  divine  right  of  bishops 


BSBATB    0!f   TUK 


or  ey«is^  rnd  deacons,  on  the  comiiiiseion,  whieli  Jesiii  Christ  givet 
to  hb  ■pottleti  and  I  aiii  mmmmi  for  nil  the  comeqiwiicet  of  this  ad* 
miatioii.  For  hy  every  rale  of  intefpietatloo,  I  mast  apply  erery  word 
of  the  comiiiisaion  to  the  apoetlea;  because  it  addreaaea  them  only. 
But  let  none  ha  alsrmed  at  this  declaration :  nothing  ia  jeopardiied^ 
father,  indeed,  all  is  secured  by  it. 

In  the  presence  of  the  apostles  alone,  he  pronounced  these  words ; 
**  All  authority  in  heaven  and  on  earth  is  given  to  me ;  go  you  there- 
Ibre  aid  convert  all  the  nations,  haptiBing  them  into  the  name  of  tha 
Fkthar  and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  teaching  them  to  observe  all 
iie  thinga  which  I  have  commanded  you ;  and  lo,  /  am  with  you  ai' 
iMiyt,  even  to  the  conclusion  of  this  state,**  or  to  the  end  of  the  age  or 
world. 

Thia  commission  created  plenipotentiaries :  It  reared  up  ambassa- 
dors, and  pve  to  the  apostles  the  same  power  of  erecting  thechurchi 
which  God  gave  to  Moaea  for  raising  the  tabernacle  in  the  wilderness. 
They  had  all  the  authority  of  Christ  to  set  up  what  orders  they  pleas- 
ad.  They  created  both  bishops  and  deacons ;  and  as  the^  had  a  di- 
vine right  to  do  so,  ao  those  created  by  them  have  a  divine  right  to 
iiileiate  in  the  duties  of  those  offices.  A  true  interpretation  of  the 
promise,  **Iam  wUk  ^ou,"  will  go  far  to  confirm  the  declaration,  that 
they  neither  had,  nor  could  have  aucceaaora  in  office.  Of  thia,  how- 
aver,  again — 

Meanwhile,  it  may  he  objected  that  Paul  waa  an  apostle,  and  ac- 
ted wiihout  this  commission.  He  had.  Indeed,  a  apecial  commission, 
and  the  qualifications  of  an  apostle.  He  had  ieen  and  heard  the  Lord. 
For  to  this  end  the  Lord  appeared  to  him.  But  aa  respected  time,  he 
■tiwvMged  he  was  born  rather  two  late  to  be  an  apostle — he  was 
••  kom  mtt  tf  due  lintel  How,  then,  could  any  of  them  have  succea- 
iora  at  this  day  ! 

The  gentleman  mentioned  aome  two  persons  in  the  Old  Testament. 
Thev  could  have  no  successors  in  office,  according  to  the  argument  on 
Iniid.  It  waa  absolutely  impossible  that  Moses  could  have  a  aucces- 
ior.  HIa  office  and  commission  were  really  from  God,  and  strictly 
peculiar  to  himaelf.  He  brought  the  Jews  out  of  Egypt,  and  erected 
the  tabernacle  ;  thia  waa  hla  peculiar  office,  which,  m  ita  very  nature, 
m^/liind  wkm  mee  ilt  duiiet  wertfuIJUfed.  The  commission  of  Joshua, 
in  like  manner,  was  also  peculiar  to  himself,  and  could  not  possibly  de- 
•aeiid  to  a  aaccessor.  When  he  led  Israel  across  the  Jordan,  and  di- 
vided tha  land  by  lot  amongst  them,  his  worka  and  office  naturally  ei- 
pired.  So  when  the  apoetlea  preached  the  goapel,  revealed  the  whole 
will  of  Jeaoa  Christ,  and  ereelai  hla  church  and  all  its  proper  officera 
and  dutiea,  their  work  was  done,  and  they,  like  Moses  and  Joshua,  be- 
b|f  olieera  extraordinary,  could  have  no  auccessora#-[Time  expired.] 

Mafpad  10  o'hkek  J.  M 

Biaiiop  PiTECEu.  riaei. 

Here  la,  beloved  friends,  as  plain  and  lodcal  a  caae  for  arguments 
tion,  and  aa  fair  an  opportunity  afforded  for  refutation,  aa  ever  the 
snnala  of  controversy  exhibited.  The  firat  argument  of  my  friend 
amounta  to  thia,  viz :  That  for  reaaona  he  haa  given,  the  Greek  church 
haa  superior  claims  upon  our  attention  to  the  Roman. 

I  have  quoted  councils,  general  and  particular  laws,  usages,  appeals, 


ROMAN   CATHOUC    XXLIOION. 


53 


Iho  anthortty  of  Greek  and  Latin  fathers,  that  is  to  say,  the  most  au- 
thentic teatimony  of  the  firat  ages,  to  show  that  with  Rome  was  the 
primacy  of  all  the  churches.    This,  at  once,  upaets  all  that  he  has  said. 

He  says  the  first  seven  councils  were  Greek ;  and  that  therefore  the 
Greek  church  had  the  preeminence.  But,  I  ask,  who  convoked  tliose 
councils  ?  Who  approved  them  1  Who  sanctioned  their  canons,  and 
gave  throughout  the  entire  church  the  force  of  law  to  their  decisions  I 
Who  guarded  them  against  errors,  and  set  them  right  when  they  were 
going,  or  had  gone  astray  1  It  was  the  pope.  1  have  already  said, 
that  Sylvester,  bishop  of  Rome,  aware  of  the  danger  that  menaced  the 
faith  in  the  east,  convoked  the  great  council  of  Nice — that  the 
emperor  Constantino,  the  raler  of  ue  east  and  west,  of  Rome  and 
of  Constantinople,  the  man,  consequently,  upon  whom  as  chief  magis- 
trate of  the  Roman  empire  it  devolved,  afforded  the  necessary  facilities 
to  the  various  bishops  to  come  to  the  council.  Again,  who  presided 
as  legate  of  the  pope  I  Osios  of  Cordova,  in  Spain,  a  western  man, 
assisted,  as  is  and  has  been  customary,  by  two  inferior  ecclesiastics. 

The  jealous  Greeks  beheld  all  this,  and  surely  they  would  not  have 
permitted  Rome  thus  to  assume  the  supremacy,  if  her  right  to  it  had 
not  been  universally  admitted  since  the  days  of  her  founder  St.  Peter. 
Is  it  not  the  most  splendid  proof  of  the  correctness  of  my  argument  ? 
The  strongest  evidence  that  could  be  desired  of  the  discomfiture  of 
myadver^ry? 

I  thought  to  have  seen  a  more  powerful  display  of  logic  from  the 
strong  and  disciplined  mind  of  my  friend  Mr.  C. ;  but  1  attributed  the 
poverty  of  his  argument  to  indisposition  on  his  part,  or  to  the  weak- 
ness of  his  cause. 

Well,  another  reason  Is  stated,  to  prove  the  supremacy  of  the  Greek 
church,  viz. :  that  the  questions  discussed  in  these  councils  were  of 
Greek  origin.  Is  it  then  to  be  wondered  at,  that  as  almost  every  error 
in  the  old  church  originated  in  the  East,  it  should  be  there  eonectedl 
that  the  remedy  should  be  applied  where  the  disease  existed  1 

The  Greeks  were  at  all  times  a  curious,  inquisitive,  restless  people. 
The  passion  for  disputation  displayed  in  the  schools  of  the  philosophers 
was,  aa  by  contagion,  communicated  to  many  of  the  professors  of 
Christianity.  But  the  manner  in  which  it  operated  upon  the  one  and 
the  other  was  essentially  different.  With  the  philosopher  such  ques- 
tions were  objects  of  understanding  only,  subjects  of  speculation; 
whereon  the  ingenuity  of  a  minute  mind  might  employ  or  waste  itself. 
Bat  with  the  christian  they  were  matters  of  truth  and  falsehood,  of 
belief  or  disbelief,  and  he  felt  assured  that  his  eternal  interests  would 
be  influenced  if  not  decided  by  his  choice.  As  soon  as  the  copious 
language  of  Greece  was  vaguely  applied  to  the  definition  of  apiritual 
things^  and  the  explanation  of  heavenly  mysteries,  the  field  of  eonten* 
tion  seemed  to  be  removed  from  earth  to  air,  where  the  foot  found 
nothing  stable  (nothing  like  the  rock  of  Rome — new  and  striking 
proof  of  ita  necessity)  to  rest  upon ;  where  arguments  were  easily 
eluded,  and  where  the  space,  in  which  to  fly  and  rally,  was  infinite. 
Add  to  this  the  nature  and  genius  of  the  disputants ;  for  the  origin  Tf 
tkue  diiputea  may  be  traced  without  any  exception  to  the  restless  imagtntf 
Horn  if  the  Easi,  The  violent  temperament  of  the  orientals,  as  it  wi's 
highly  adapted  to  the  reception  of  religious  impressions,  and  admittetl 
them  with  fervor  and  earnestness,  intermingled,  so  olosely,  passion 
b3 


m 


.UBiATc  on  Tns 


VOMAN  CATHOLIC    KEUOION. 


6& 


I-' J 


with  piety,  a»  scarcely  to  conceiTe  them  sepaiafole.  The  natnral  ardor 
df  their  lealings  was  not  abated  bj  the  natural  aobtilty  of  iheir  bihIct. 
•tawliiif ,  which  was  sharpened  in  the  schools  of  Kgypt ;  and  when 
!bit  latter  began  to  be  occupied  by  iiiquiriea  in  which  the  former  were 
M  d«i|ily  engaged,  it  was  to  be  eipeelod  that  many  extravagances 
would  follow.     Vid.  Waddington,  p.  93. 

Yet,  because  it  was  in  the  east  that  the  heresies  in  the  ancient  day 
of  the  church  commenced,  and  in  the  east  the  councils  met  to  correct 
llioaehefMmi  the  Greek  church  must  therefore  have  been  the  mother 
oliifili!  Sieh  is  my  friend^s  argnment!  and  it  is  now  plain,  ihatt 
Iwbltr.  a  more  inconclusive,  and  a  more  irrational  one,  he  could  scarce- 
ly havo  advanced  before  this  enlightened  assembly.  But  what  is  slIU 
more  remarkable,  did  not  these  very  councils,  these  Greek  councils, 
•ttiiiitli  by  their  own  acts,  and  these  of  the  most  solemn  and  authenuc 
einneliry  ■Urn  aupremacy  of  the  Roman  seel  Did  they  not  solicit  the 
mm%  approbation  of  their  decrees,  and  acknowledge  that  without  hit 
ianistioa  their  proceedings  were  void  of  effecti 

He  says  iliat  the  emperor  presided.  I  have  already  answered  that 
tlie  emperor  did  not  preside.  He  distinctly  acknowledged  the  spiritual 
to  be  independent  of  th«i  temporal  power,  he  alleged  thai  he  pretended 
to  BO  right  to  preside.  He  knew  that  God  never  told  the  emperors, 
Ms  predecessors,  to  preside  over  the  deliberations  of  his  church.  The 
constitution  of  that  church  had  been  established  three  hundred  yeara 
before  Constantino  became  a  proselyte  to  Christianity.  It  is  unhearu 
of  that  a  temporal  monarch  ever  presided  over  the  deliberations  of  the 
church,  or  ruled  in  ecclesiaslical  matters.  At  least  we  catholics  submit 
to  no  such  dictation — such  a  confusion  of  things  divine  and  human— 
•tich  an  anomaly  I  I  am  sorry  it  is  allowed  in  England.  In  that  coun- 
try even  a  woman  may  be,  for  a  woman  has  been,  the  head  of  th« 
church,  as  in  the  instance  of  queen  Elizabeth;  nay,  a  little  child,  as 
io  iImi case  of  Edward.  It  is  contrary  to  reason,  to  scripture,  to  humaR 
fig hta  and  divine  ordinances,  that  such  as  these  should  presume  in  any 
vnaatioiia,  to  jfive  or  withhold  authority  to  the  ministry,  to  preach  th« 
fM|wl  of  Christ,  or  to  dispense  the  mysteries  of  God.  It  outrag«»t 
•very  leeling  of  sanctity,  it  de^des,  it  vilifies  the  priesthood,  to  s«e 
bishops  and  archbishops  kneeling  at  the  feet  of  women  and  boys,  and 
praying  them  to  grant  a  Heeme  to  preach. 

Mf  friend  has  charged  me  with  making  professions  of  respect  for 
BpMeopalians  and  Episcopal  methodists,  &c.,  but  do  I  suppress  the 
tniliit  and  do  I  fail  to  censure  them  where  they  too  are  wrong.  My 
lliond  has  gratuitously  presented  himself  before  this  assembly  as  Uie 
•hampion  of  Protestantism;  and  I  have  shown  that  he  is,  if  at  all,  but 
little  less  opposed  than  I  am  to  the  denominations  I  have  named,  on 
III*  f  iial  point  of  orders  and  a  called  and  sent  ministry.  Ho  would 
lliiM  tlioiii  with  an  equivocal  defence  of  their  principles  to-day,  and 
iitn  pioioot  them  with  his  own  views  in  theology — with  Camphell- 
ism,  baptized  Protestantism, — [Here  the  moderators  called  Bishop 
Furcell  to  order.] 

My  friend,  learnedly,  (and  I  give  him  credit  for  it,)  showed  how  it 
came  that  there  were  so  many  errors  and  questionable  doctrines  in  the 
UiOik  ebuich.  I  havn  statwl  the  causes,  humanly  speaking,  of  tht 
errors.  It  is  then,  an  undisputed  fact,  that  they  were  more  numeroufli 
ill  the  Greek  aiau  iti  the  Eouaii  church ',  that  llta  tiouidn  cnuich  was 


wmparatively  free  from  them.  But  he  has  plaimy  misconceiv^  the 
iXre^  tole  drawn  from  the  fact;  and  it  is  Aia:  that  as  Rome 
wSlhTprimary  see,  the  centre  of  unity,  the  mother  and  mistress  of 
riUhrchuiSi^,  God  watched  over  her  with  peculi«  cam,  an^^^^ 
served  her  from  the  errors  and  ^eresjes  that  provi^  infim^ely  m^^^ 
fatal  than  the  pagan  persecutions,  to  the  churches  of  the  east,  l^h  e 
Ih^y  weTe  dist?ac^.i,  the  Roman  church  w^  ^^'^  ^^^.^^ L^^ 
thev  were  in  dan<rer  of  breaking  to  pieces  the  edifice  of  faith,  8he  iw« 
T^Jndti^  herlelf,  and  laborfng  ti^  consolidate  them  under  one  creed. 
TantSd^  proU,^  t^^  gospf  1  life  in  the  east,  it  was  tbe  auAonty 
if  RoW  ^By  hef  waS  the^dJctrine  of  the  Savior  vindicated,  and 
kent  pure  from  the  foul  admixture,  the  contamination  of  heresy.  By 
herwerTAiianism,  Nestorianism,  Eutychianism,  Monothohsm,  and  m 
htt  Jr^othTrToveW,  the  spurious  progeny  of  dangerous  opimon* 
in  the  east,  «BCce8»iTely  condemned.  .„.,^_,  i_  «i„ 

And  now.  harine  disposed  of  the  argument  which  appeam  in  «h« 
«^rf  ^r^Uemln-a  remarks,  1  will  go  on  with  a  ^«?"on  of  ^t, 
towhich  he  ha.  again  referred,  touching  ihc  word  pi«Ao/«.  He  says 
thaTit  is  not  found  in  the  New  TestamenU  Admitting  that  t  is  not  in 
the  b^v  of  the  wnon,  which  I  did  not  contend  for.  yet  it  is  prefixed 
to  sSmeVf  thTepistle'^  and  a.  old.  if  not  older,  as  »  *»;f^  bel°«gmg 
to  Si"hou8ehold  of  faith,  than  they  are.  He  said  Uie  word  K^"-. 
}^»X«fcS  was  orefixed  to  the  Epistle  of  James  in  the  year  1549,  by 
KUZnror  Robert  B.irnne.  by  which  name  that  fiunou. 

fS  pKnIer  is  better  known-about  SM. !«»"  »8°;.  ,  "i,^^ 
will  show  you  that  here  again  his  learning  is  at  fault,  that  to  the  300 
r^rs  muVbe  added  a  thousand  more,  and  then  that  the  origin  of  Ae 
?,™d  T^yl\  with  Christianity.     Before  quoting  the  '«'"™°»y  °f  ^U 

„%:7p!^ttrnd?ntrc'^^^ifor-=.anT^^^^^^^ 
SttS'orcan.^^^^^^^ 

•hlSU"  '?WroV[h'e:e3es.  viz.  that  of  St  i»me., Jhe^^o^, 
«L  Peter  the  2d  and  3d  of  St.  John,  the  epistle  of  St.  Jnde,  as  alw  ">e 

Sisti:  of  SU  Paul  to  theHebrewa,  --i, '»'«  *rt^»L^°:i,^ 
H.v..Ution  of  St.  John,  were  doubted  of,  and  not  arrays  and  eTerr 
Shere^i/ed  h.  the  three  first  ages,  till  the  canon  and  ^X^loP"  »f 
Jhe  h^okfof  Vcripture  were  deteniined  by  the  authority  of  the  Catho- 
i-  l  ill  .krZ.reme  iudte  of  all  controversies  in  matters  of  fiuth 
i^trrion^~oK  tils  appointment  of  onrS.,ior  ChrUt,  ex- 
I^Trnwy  pla'Ss  in  th"  ho'T  scriptures.  The«.  1  have  me»- 
5^!j  ^  «rSinlT.  for  some  time,  doubted  of;  they  are  sull  d<«*t. 
:?rfby*::reTfZ'l.^"fonne,..  .»;"*"•,*•  17211:^:1"^^ 
~f„rm»tion  is  not  ashamed  to  »ay,  that  this  episUe  of  St.  James, «»  i» 

^JZot^n  Na.i.n»M.,  at  that  eariy  period,  uses  the  word  Clh- 
.Hc..«ldesignates^tl,em^,.l.at^name: 

Grtg.  JVazianzen,  Carmen  de  Canon.  Scrtpt. 

Id  English-"  Some  sif  there  «6  anven  Catholic  epistles,  otheii 


OXBATS  ON   TAB 


IImiI  tlitn  Mt  jMili  thfBt— OM  of  Janes,  one  of  Peter,  and  one  of  John  *' 
80  iMwIi  ibr  tie  Imitli  tfe.  Does  not  iky  friend  tay  his  prayers! 
Boit  not  e¥ery  Protestant  onite  wioi  erery  Catholic  in  saying,  **I 
beliefe  in  the  holy  Catholie  church,"  as  we  are  taofftit  in  the  apostles* 
eieed  t  SfiealEing  of  this  most  aocieot  formala  of  faith,  composed,  as 
it  is  heliercdv  hy  the  apnstles  theniselYes«  before  they  separated  for 
iM  peal  iPQiii  of  f  naeliinf  to  all  nations,  that  it  may  be  for  ever  n 
biBief  nnbnaiid  aa  abridfment  of  sound  apostolic  belief,  Wsddinf* 
tea  says,  p.  46.  *«The  creed  which  was  irst  adopted,  mmd  IktAptrkapt 
liillt  very  earKeti  agtf  by  the  church  of  Rome,  was  that  which  is  now 
eailed  the  apisiles'^ creed;  and  it  was  the  general  opiolon  from  the 
Ibnrth  century  downwards,  tkai  il  wm  aduaSy  the  proAidim  of  Hum 
Mtmedpermma  muamhledfor  thai  purptmei  our  evidence  is  not  snificient 
in  estanlish  that  fact,  and  some  writers  Tery  confidently  reject  it. 
But  there  is  reasonable  ground  for  onr  assurance  that  the  form  of  fiuth, 
wbieh  we  still  repeat  and  inculcate,  was  in  use  and  power  in  the  fery 
eaiiv  propagation  of  our  reh'gion."*  Now  will  the  gentleman  tell 
«•  tlial  the  woid  Oaikoiie — ^was  unknown  to  antiquity  ? 

Yon  wil  perseite,  my  friends,  that  until  the  ¥ery  minute  Mr.  Camp* 
bell  apiais,!  know  not  what  he  is  going  to  say..  You  will  not  woo- 
ier  that  following  him,  my  discourse  should  be  desultory  and  rambling. 
I  am  here  under  every  disadvantage  to  which,  a  speaker  can  be  subject. 
Obll|ed  to  leave  the  beaten  highway  and  follow  him  through  the 
iiiekets  Into  which,  he  finds  it  useful  to  plunge  so  frequently. 

I  have  at  this  moment  in  my  band,  a  copy  of  the  New  Testament,  m 
beautiful  edition,  published  in  Glasgow,  a  Presbyterian  city,  and  also 
an  edition  of  Robert  Etienne.  Behold  (displaying  them)  the  title 
^Ootholic,**  prefixed  in  both,  to  these  epistles. 

1  llBYe  BOW  established  the  fact  that  Catholic  was  the  ancient  name 
ef  iieebunsh — that  no  other  than  the  Roman  Catholic  was  entitled  to 
<hBl  BiOM— 4hat  the  Roman  Catholic  church  is  the  Calholic  church 
if  flllBgei,  that  in  all  ages  it  has  had  a  head.  For  we  may  call  the 
pope  by  any  name  we  please,  the  name  is  nothing.  It  is  the  station, 
and  the  incumbent  thereof,  that  it  is  important  to  ascertain,  and  the 
BMNiday  is  not  clearer  than  that  both  existed  from  the  very  origin  of  the 
ehristiaB'  raiigioo  in  Rome. ' 

He  argues  against  the  supremacy  of  RooBe  from  the  circumstance 
that  all  the  ecclesiastical  words  are  Greek. 

This  is  not  at  all  surprising.  There  was  not  a  particle  of  the  Scrip- 
tures  originally  written  in  Latin.  Surely  my  friend  must  be  hard  pres- 
sed for  want  of  argumeBtf  when  he  graaM  at  such  a  floating,  improba- 
ble,  airy  one  aa  that  I  Words  are  hut  the  signs  of  ideas.  But  he  al^ 
iiiBa  that  all  iie  eplstlea  are  written  to  Greek  eitiea.  Was  then  none 
of  these  epistles  wiittoB  to  Rome !  And  wae  Bmm  a  Groek  city  I 
Ilfie  not  Paul  snrpass  himself— does  he  not  reason  most  deeply 
Ib  UmI  epistle  !  Does  he  not  style  the  Romans  the  "  Called  of  Jesus 
Christ ;  the  beloved  of  God !»'  Does  be  not  say,  ist  ch.  v.  3,  "I  give 
thanks  to  my  God,  through  Jesus  Christ,  for  you  all,  because  your 
faith  is  spoken  of  in  the  whole  world"  I    Is  it  not  m  that  epistle  that 

•  A  note  to  Waddiii)rtoa  on  thii  rabjert,  contains  the  rollowinf;  remarSc  "  Igw 
nsniis.  Jnttifi,  and  IreMtiM,  make  00  meotioD  of  it,  but  thej  oocatiionaHy  repeat 
woida.  costaiaad  io  it,  which  it  hsld  aa  a  proof  thfet  they  kneir  it  by  hearf 


KOMAN  CATHOUC    RELIGION. 


&$f 


he  eonfbonds  the  Jews,  by  pruvine  that  the  ceremonial  works  of  the 
law  avail  them  Bothing  towards  salvation,  and  the  Gentiles  by  snew- 
inff  thai  their  shameful  eicesses,  notwithstanding  the  boasted  lights 
of  philosophy,  involved  them  equally  with  the  rejected  Jews  in  the 
divine  maledicuoo  I  Does  he  not  devote  eleven  chapters  of  this  epis- 
tie  to  establish  solidly  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  christian  faithl 
Finally,  was  not  the  church  of  Rome  at  least  as  ancient  as  the  church 

nfConnthl  rm.  *i 

My  friend  spoke  of  transubstantiation,  and  purgatory,     1  hcse  wu 
come  in  their  proper  place  in  the  debate.  n  .u  1:- 

The  conclusion  of  all  his  arguments  is,  that  the  Roman  Catholw 
choreh  is  a  sect.  This,  I  may  venture  to  say,  he  has  failed  to  prove. 
Indeed  he  has  done  any  thing  but  prove  it ;  for  he  has  in  fact  strengthen- 
ed my  grounds  of  defence,  for  the  more  he  has  questioned  my  authort- 
ties  and  arguments,  the  more  signally  have  I  established  them. 

My  friend  is  correct  in  saying  that  to  prove  the  church  not  Catholte, 
Is  to  prove  her  neither  holy  nor  apostolic.    Had  he  acted  on  this  hint, 
and  compressed  his  first  three  propositions  into  one,  and  condensatton 
is  all  important  in  discussion,  he  would  have  greaUy  abridged  his  own 
labor,  and  saved  this  audience  and  myself  much  loss  of  time.    1  have 
proved  that  the  Roman   Catholic  church  is  now  the  only  church 
that  is,  as  a  church,  (and  not  as  a  band  of  sailors  or  travellers  without  any 
fixed  habitation,)  spread  over  the  entire  world  ;  that  she  only  has  been 
so  from  the  beginning,  to  the  exclusion  of  every  sect :  that  she  alone 
now  bears,  that  she  alone  has  ever  home  the  name  of  Catholic ;  that 
no  other  denomination,  no  sect  now  has  or  ever  had  a  right  to  it—and 
that,  as  she  is  Catholic,  she  is  also  holy,  she  is  apostolic,  she  is 
divine,  and  consequently  the  only  true  church  of  Christ.     By  the 
same  strictness    of  investigation   and  of   reasoning,  by   the   same 
•plendid   evideme  if  fadn  I  will  prove  that  she   alone  is  united  in 
faith  and   goTcmment  as  the  true  church  should  be;    for  Christ 
prayed  for  hia  disciples  the  night  before  he  suffered,  "that  they 
may  be  ohb,  aa  thou  FaUier  in  Heaven  and  1  are  one."    Novr  in  what 
church  shall  we  seek  for  this  unity  !    We  shall  see  that,  later  m  the  de- 
bate, for  notwithstanding  Uie  admission  of  my  friend,  we  nnust  plod  our 
weary  romd,  debating  these  propositions  as  he  has  penned  them.  But 
the  gentieman  Rays,  "  the  Roman  Catholic  church  oisumea  every  thing. 
No,  my  brethren,  it  is  not  so.    When  she  can  so  validly  establish  her 
claim,  she  does  not,  she  has  no  occasion  to  atsumt  any  thing.    She 
proves  all  things,  and  holds  fast  to  them  because  tiiey  are  good.    In 
the  first  place  we  prove  from  scripture  that  Chnst  did  establish  an 
earthly  head  to  his  church,  and  tiiat  that  head  was  the  aposUe  Peter 
If  not,  why  did  he  say  to  Peter.  "  TAoa  art  Pder,  (a  rock)  and  1^ 
thiiroek  will  I  build  my  churchy  and  the  gales  of  hell  shall  not  prevail 
against  it"  1    Again,  he  did  give  him  a  preeminence  over  the  other 
apoedes.    If  not,  why  did  he  say  to  him,  Luke,  xxii.  32,  "  Simonj 
Simon,  behold  Satan  hath  desired  to  have  you  (in  the  plural,  that  is,  an 
the  apostles)  that  he  may  sift  you  as  wheat,  but  I  have  prayed  for  thee 
that  thy  faith  fail  rwt,  and  thou  bein^  converted,  confirm  ihv  brethren    * 
He  told  Peter  tiiat  he  would  deny  him— Uiat  he  would  fall-jbiU  he  at 
the  same  time  cheered  him  by  the  divine  assurance  thai  his  fall  should 
not  be  for  ever,  that  ho  would  arise  from  it,  and  that  after  his  transitory 
humiliation,  no  longer  presumptuously  confiding  in  his  own  sUength, 


imiATB  Oir  THS 

lot  placiner  all  hit  tfift  in  Ood,  ha  ihould  not  only  Mcorelj  stand  hlm^ 
•elfiielbn  botli  J«wi  mnd  Gcntilei,  bat  likowinn  ntrengthen  mnd  ftap- 
mm  his  hwsthwi.  For  this  Christ  prayed  for  Peter,  and  the  Fktkw 
who  also  loves  the  church,  heard  and  he  will  ever  hear  that  prayer. 
The  faith  of  Peter  hath  never  failed.  When  did  he  ever  say  this  to 
the  other  apostles  1  Peter  is  named  first,  when  the  apostles  are  enu- 
BMitted  ;  he  speaks  first  in  the  meeting  of  the  apostles  and  brethrsn, 
mild  fives  instructions  to  proceed  to  the  choosing  an  apostle  in  the  placa 
of  the  Iseariot  He  is  the  first  to  reproach  the  Jews  wiih  deicide,  and  at 
his  preaching  eight  thousand  are  converted.  He  is  sent  by  an  angel 
fironi  heavent  to  the  gentile  Complins ;  is  released  from  prison  by  an 
■ifil ;  confirms  the  Samaritans  with  St,  John  :  healeth  Ericas  at  Lyd- 
da :  raiseth  Tahttha  from  death  at  Jopoa  ;  founds  the  first  see  among 
ili9  fpitilet  at  Antioch.  He  speaks  first  in  the  council  at  Jerusalem, 
••man,  Iwiifen,  &c."  Acts,  xv.  "  and  all  the  multitnde  among  whom 
them  iad  been  previously,  much  disputing,  held  their  peace.**  **  Then 
after  three  years"  says  St.  Paul,  Gal.  i.  13,  **I  went  to  Jerusalem  to 
Me  Petei,  and  I  tarried  with  him  fifteen  days."  And  ch.  2.  v.  1.  "Then 
•fter  foiiftitii  years  I  went  np*  again  to  ierasalem,  and  I  went  up  ac 
mrdimg  i&  remtaiion,  and  amf erred  with  them  the  gospel  which  I  preacli 
imong  the  gentiles,  lest  perhaps  I  shonld  run,  or  had  mn  in  vain." 

My  friend  savs  that  this  assumption  is  followed  by  injurious  effects, 
s.iginus  and  political,  inconsequence  of  the  power  wielded  by  a  sinijfle 
•Hdividual.  This  directly  impeaches  the  foreknowledge  and  sanctity 
of  Christ.  He  established  the  power,  and  from  its  exercise  within  the 
last  limits,  which  he  has  prescribed,  I  maintain  that  no  consequences 
injurious  either  to  religious  or  civil  society  can  ever  ensue.  History 
atiMts,  and  1  have  quoteil  some  striking  instances  from  the  records  of 
the  Greek  church,  that  the  power  of  the  popes  was  conservativb.  Their 
iiinence  has  ever  been  most  favorable  to  the  best  interests  of  society 
as  well  as  of  religion.  They  were  the  friends  of  peace,  the  patrons 
of  learninf,  the  umpires  of  angry  princes  and  hostile  nations  on  the 
mm  hand,  while  on  the  other  they  preserved  pure  and  unconlaminated, 
the  holy  deposit  of  the  truth  and  proscribed  error.  Confined  to  its  pro- 
per sphere  the  influence  of  the  head  of  the  church  must  needs  be  salu- 
tary I  imit,  if  God  was  wise,  be  beneficial  and  far  above  reproach, 
Tlili  fower  has  been  exerted  for  the  welfare  of  society  under  every  form 
fflf  fawmment,  monarchical,  aristoeratical,  mixed,  and  republican.  It 
is  the  friend  of  all.  It  is  inreconcileable  with  none,  but  of  the  tempo- 
ral influence  of  the  popes  it  will  be  time  enough  to  speak  in  its  proper 
f  liMw  I  will  now  proceed  to  show  that  the  want  of  an  ecclesiastical 
■aperior,  whom  all  are  bound  to  obey,  lets  in  a  deloge  of  evils,  and 
th«e  irremediable^  on  every  religious  body  that  wants  a  head.  Reason, 
alone  shonM  attest  this  truth,  without  further  illustration.  The  sheep- 
fold  over  which  there  has  been  placed  no  shepherd,  will  soon  be  the 
prey  of  the  wolf.  The  school  in  which  no  teacher  presides,  the  soci- 
ety which  recognises  no  chief  magistrate,  will  not  fail  to  exhibit  a 
Meme  of  confusion,  and  must  finally  be  dissolved.  Let  ns  appeal  to 
experience.  What  has  multiplied  the  (so  called)  christian  sects  to 
•iieh  an  excess  that  neither  the  evil  nor  the  remedy  can  be  any  longer 
•ninred  in  Protestant  communions!  It  is  the  principle  contended  for 
by  my  opponent.  Ii  is  this,  as  bishop  Smith  justly  obsonres,  more 
prolific  than  the  knife  that  divides  the  polypus,  that  daily  multiplies 


BOHAN   CATHOLIC    RKUOION. 


50 


divisions  and  produces  new  sects  in  chrisaanity.   Hear  a  hte  numbo 
df  the  Baptist  Banner,  spwJdng  of  this  conUoversy.    It  aays^- 

"  But  to  be  ««riou8,  we  cannot  believe  that  any  good  will  lollow  this  debate. 
But  too  much  excitement  in  attempted  to  be  gotten  up  against  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic*— an  excitement  bordering  on  intolerance.     Could  we  feel  assured,  either 
from  his  course  in  this  instance  or  from  a  retrospect  of  his  past  life,  that  Mr. 
Campbell  souffht  this  discussion  solely  to  vindicate  truth  and  expose  error,  and 
oot  dstentatiously  to  exhibit  his  tact  in  debate  and  to  reap  a  pecuniary  harvest 
bv  a  new  publication,  we  might  feel  less  distrust  of  consequences,  and  should 
bare  some  (aint  hope  that  probably  good  would  ensue;  but  rredalous,  nay,  stu- 
Did  must  be  the  man.  who  in  looking  over  the  circuiuftances  which    ha^«/on- 
lurred  in  originaliog  this  debate,  can  suppose  that  any  religious  or  commendable 
Motive  prompted  him  to  throw  the  gauntlet  and  provoke  the  controversy.     In 
lookimr  over  his  past  career,  a  love  of  truth  and  a  desire  to  promote  the  pemcn 
and  prosperity  of  Zion.  have  not  been  the  promine;.l  traiU  which  have  marked 
hU  cWrwrter  ind  rendered  conspicuous  hU  course.     [Bishop  P  was  here  called 
io^rienMr.  Campbell  also  here  observed,  that  as  he  had  read  the  worst  part 
of  the  article  he  might  read  the  balance;  and  the  point  of  order  being  examin- 
^,  the  bo^d  decided  that  he  was  io  order.].    We  do  not  speak  for  other 
nlaces.  but  in  Kentucky  he  has  caused  more  serious  injury  to  the  cause  ot  reli 
fion.  iiore  disturbance,  more  wranding,  collision,  and  division  in  »o«^>^*2*  "' * 
?«w  year^  than  in  our  humble  jucTgtnent,  the  Catho  .cs  can  ever  do.     But  we 
Sbe^iS^    The  debate  will  teke  pface.     The  Campbell.tes  will  sip  delicious  wis- 
S2«  Sm  the  lips  of  their  leader.     A  new  impulse  will  be  given  to  their  now 
drooping  state.  *They  will  again  wage  his  hi^h  claims  to  com«|tency  to  reform 
l*™Xn  and  introduci  the  Nfillennium.    AntTMr.  Campbell  will  have  the  proud 
SSion  of  rendering  great  good-to  himself  by  tW  «le  of  another  \>ook J 
This  will  be  about  all  that  will  result  from  th^  discussion.  j   «     lur- 

I  knew  not  until  yesterday  that  the  Baptists  were  opposed  to  Mr. 
Campbell;  but  as  necessarily  as  the  stream  flows  from  Us  source, 
do  these  disastrous  effects  which  the  Baptist  Banner  deprecates,  flow 
from  the  system  which  acknowledges  no  head  in  religious  matters, 
but  allows  every  individual,  qualified  or  disqualified,  to  give  his  own 
crude  fancies  for  the  revelation  of  heaven.  ,  ^    _  „   ..         ,  ,.    -,. 

The  Zion's  Advocate  of  the  28th  ult.  and  the  Palladium  of  the  7  h 
insu  give  similar  testimony  against  the  l^^^^'^^^^'f^f^^y  ^"^"^ 
I  spare  him  the  reading.    You  can  now  judge  ^^  *»^f^^!?^\^yj^.;™*^^^ 
his  are  biliemess  and  confusion,  those  of  the  Catholics,  admittuig  a 
sipr^^macy  in  the  church,  are  order,  unity  and  peace.     H\X    "  cT 
sarily  creates  enmities  and  endless  altercations  m  the  church;  the  Ca- 
Solic  rule  cuts  them  up  by  the  very  roots,  and  not  only  arrests  their 
irrowth,  but  renders  their  very  existence  impossible. 
^  Mr.  Campbell  said  that  the  Roman  Catholic  church  was  an  ajws- 
tacy  from  /^  true  Church,  and  that  this  e^«"^  ««  »7?^?"^  *"  *^^^^ 
mU  of  the  worid,  took  place  precisely  on  the  16  h  of  July  10^' ^»'«« 
she  separated  from  the  *Greek  church.    It  is  a  pity,  as  he  intendedu> 
be  so  particular,  that  he  did  not  tell  us  whether  n  was  aid  ^^y^^^^' 
But  perceiving  the  terrible  eff-ect  of  this  admission,  upon  h  s  arp^- 
ment,  he  retraces  his  steps,  and  taking  us  all  aback  Jie  fay«  \hat  the 
Greek  church  was  not  after  all  the  true  church  ^f  Christ,  and  thus  he 
has  left  us  as  much  in  the  dark  as  ever.    Remember  I  told  htm  how 
much  it  had  puzzled  the  world  and  would  puzzle  him  to  settle  that 
poS    I  ask'him  again  then,  if  the  Roman  Catho  ic  church  apostatiz- 
£d  from  the  church  of  Christ  at  the  period  in  4«estion,  and  the  Greek 
church,  from  which  she  separated,  was  as  corrupt  as  nereelt,  where 
was,  at  tharUme,  the  true  church  1     God's  covenant  with  her  Ezech 
xxxWi.  62,  was  an  everlasting  covenant  of  peace  a  co^^"^ ^;^'^gV  a^ 
of  day  and  night,  to  last  for  all  generaUons,  .Ire.  xxxui.  20,  21,  al- 


DEBATX  Oil  THS 

waft  viiiUtt  Ys*  It*  3*  X  Mtchere  r?.  1.  3.  tprmd  lar  and  near,  and 
iMoliiiif  UMiiy  Dfttiinity  ft.  zi.  8.  Ban.  zi.  35.  44.  Malacb.  i.  11. 
Tlie  pillar  and  the  |[roiml  of  troth,  nnfmilin^;  the  gat€s  of  hell  were 
never  to  prevail  apinst  her.  If  all  these  glorious  prophecies  were  not 
fulfilled  in  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  in  what  other  church  weie  they 
Htlfilled !    When  will  my  friend  answer  me  ? 

Mr.  €•  oiiaenres  that  the  Roman  Catholic  church  or  the  see  of  Peter, 
assimes  to  be  the  representative  of  Christ  in  ill  his  power,  eccleniasti* 
cal  and  political,  and  that  as  Christ  wis  supreme  head  over  all  the 
cntli,  temporal  and  spiritual,  so  was  Peter,  and  so  are  his  successors. 

I  have  already  shewn  that  this  it  no  part  or  parcel  of  the  Catholic 
doctrine.  The  po^*s  power  is  spiritual,  his  kingdom  like  that  of 
Christ,  is  not  of  this  world.  He  has  not  a  solitarr  inch  of  ground 
over  which  to  exereise  temporal  authority  in  any  temtory  on  earth,  be- 
yond the  narrow  limits  of  the  papal  states;  and  the  authority  with 
wuch  he  is  there  invested  rather  originated  in  the  people's  preference 
of  the  bishop's  crosier  to  the  kingly  sceptre,  than  in  any  views  he  could 
ilmtiilf,  have  cherished  of  worldly  aggrandizement.  Hear  Gibbon,  in. 
fol.  p.  t30.,  Phil.  1830.  **The  want  of  laws  could  only  be  supplied 
by  the  influence  of  religion,  and  their  foreign  and  domestic  counsels 
were  moderated  by  the  authority  of  the  bishop.  His  alms,  his  ser- 
mons, his  eorrespofldence  with  the  king  and  prelates  of  the  west,  his 
leeent  services,  their  gratitude,  an  oath,  accustomed  the  Romans  to 
Cfmider  him  as  the  first  magistrate.  The  christian  humility  of  the 
]^ipm  was  not  offended  by  the  name  of  ilbintfiua  or  lord,  and  their  fao« 
and  inscription  is  still  apparent  on  the  most  ancient  coins.  Their  tem- 
poral dominion  is  now  confirmed  by  the  reverence  of  a  thousand  years ; 
and  their  noblest  title  is  the  free  choice  of  a  people,  whom  they  had 
redeemed  from  slavery.** 

I  had  a  great  deal  of  other  ground  to  go  over  on  this  point,  but  my 
tine  is  limited ;  and  I  will  now  proceed  to  review  one  of  the  most 
dreadful  char||es  ever  made  against  a  pope  of  Rome,  and  to  show  thai 
it  in  totally  without  foundation. 

Jf  I  understood  Mr.  C.  aright,  he  asserted,  that  it  was  the  pope  Gre> 
gory  consecrated  Phocas  the  centurion  king,  in  the  church  of  St.  John 
the  Baptist  in  Constantinople,  and  that  he  did  so,  contrary  to  every  law 
of  God,  or  man,  for  the  base,  the  iniquitous  purchase  of  the  title  of  pope. 

(Mr.  Campbell  reasserted  the  charge.) 

Now  I  aver  that  the  charge  is  unfounded  and  false.    I  mean  no  dis- 
lesfiect  to  Mr.  C.    He  would  not  intentionally  deceive  this  assembly 
or  wilfully  sustain  by  calumny  an  otherwise  hopeless  cause.    But 
leaving  motives  to  their  proper  judge,  I  shall  now  prove  to  this  audi 
enee  that  he  has  stated  what  is  not  true,  and  allied  odious  charges 
ipaiDst  the  pope  which  he  cannot  substantiate.    On  his  own  reputa 
tion  for  aoeuracT  and  his  knowledge  of  history  let  the  penalty  for  evoi 
rest,  of  having  been  this  day  detected  before  so  many  of  his  fellow 
citizens,  egregiously  at  fault  in  both.'Hormisdas  king  of  Persia,  indig 
nant  at  the  defeat  of  his  ^^neral  Varamus  (see  Natalis  Alex.  svc.  sext 
Art  r.  p.  2116,1  sends  him  a  petticoat  in  derision.    The  war  is  renew 
od  i  Mauridnt  loses  liOOO  troops,  taken  prisoners  by  the  Chaean  :   ho 
laHtses  to  release  them  by  paying  the  humble  pitting  set  as  a  price  on 
the  head  of  each  by  the  victor ;  they  are  butchered  in  cold  blood  ;  his 
people,  shocked  at  his  avarice  and  cruelty  revolt^Mauritius  abdicates-^ 


ltOMA:N   CATHOLIC   KEMCION. 


it 


die  people  choose  the  centurion,  Phocas,  to  reign  over  tfieiii  in  liis 
stead  ;  thepoMarth  tf.  Chmtmdimiple  emm«f^  >hoess  king.m  the 
chureh  of  sT  John  the  BapUst,  in  C.  P.    The  entire  story  is  thus  »- 

"The"'lroop«  of  Maurice  might  listen  to  the  voice  of  a  victorious  leader,  Uiey 
d..dainedTe^dmonUion.of  statesmen  and.«>phUtj..a^^ 

l!dict  which  deducted  from  their  pay  the  pnce  of  their  arro«  and  clothing,  thev 
^ecrTted  tht^^^^^  o  °a  pr.nce  FasUlblS  of  the  dangers  -^JjaU^-^^^^^^^'.^^ 
he  bad  ewaped:  and  evefy  age  must  condemn  the  mhumanity  0'".«?^f"ce  of. 
prince,  who  V  the  trifiinr  iunnom  of  «« thousand  P'^*^?  ^^^^i^'^'S^^ 
?ented  the  o»i.«:«^  of  1I.OOO  prisoner.  »»  the  hand.  <rf  tke  Ch^«.  J^^^g^ 
fervor  of  indignation,  an  order  was  signified  to  the  •^X'^A^XJ^^^'nu^ 
They  should  .^re  the  magazine,  of  the  province,  and  «»^tablish  their  w,n^^^^^ 
ter.  IP  the  hoiSle  count^  of  the  Avars.  The  mearare  of  their  gn^^jnf**  ™ 
foU-  they  pfonounced%anrice  unworthy  to  reign,  expelled  or  Saugbtered  hi. 
SJlhlttlShlrent.,  and,  under  the  commanaofPhoca,,a  simple  ce 

•d  by  hasty  raarche.  to  the  neighborhood  of  Constantmople.  „,.  „.,^,,  .t,_ 

»•  the  rigid  and  parsimoniou.  virtues  of  Maurice  had  Ion-  since  alienated  the 
hearts  of  hf.  subject. ;  and  a  vile  plebeian  who  representedliis  jo^ntenance  ^d 
apparel,  was  sealed  on  an  ass.  andfpursued  b^  the  m.precat.ons  of  ^^  multitude.* 
flU  emperor  suspected  the  populkrity  of  CJermanus  with  the  -o'd'ers  and  ciU- 

.ens;  hileared,  L  threaten^  but  he  delayed  to  •^I'LV/^tS/wam  we«^^^ 
the  imctuary  of  the  church;  the  people  ro.e  in  hw  defence,  the  wall,  were  at 
Wrted  by  the  guards,  and  the  lawlesl  city  was  abandoned  to  the  flames  and  ra 
p'mfof  nocturnal  tumult.  In  a  small  bark  the  unfortunate  M^""' 7*\^"J^»^? 
Td  nine  children,  e^ped  to  the  Asiatic  shore ;  but  the  science  of  the  wind 
compelled  him  to  lan/at  the  church  of  St.  Antoninus, near  Chakedon,^^^ 
wheSce  he  desoatched  Theodosius.  hi.  eldest  son.  to  imolore  ^e  &ratitude^ 
friendship  of  the  Persian  monarch.     For  himself,  be  refused  to  Oy.     "»»  body 
™  tortured  with  Kiatic  pains,  his  mind  was  enfeebled  bv  superstition;  he  p*. 
™ty  awaited  the  event  of  the  revolution,  and  addressecf  a  fervent  and  publ^ 
pw«  t^the  Almighty,  that  the  punishment  of  his  sin.  might  be  inflicted  in  h« 
^U  rather  thanfn  i  fiiture  life.    After  the  abdication  of  Maurice,  the  t^ 
factions  disputed  the  choice  of  an  emperor;  but  the  favorite  01  the  blues,  was  re- 
wS^by  tfe  jealousy  of  their  antagonist.,  and  Germanus  himself  was  hurried 
llong  b/ the  ciowds.  who  rushed  to  the  H^ce  of  Hebdomen.  seven  miles  from 
Jhec^ity! to  adore  the  majerty  of  Phocas.  the  centurion.     A  modest  wish  of  re- 
;  gn^g  he  purple  to  the-'rani  and  merit  of  Germanus  was  ojposed  by  J«  fesolu- 
tiSn.  more  Sbst^nate,  and  equally  sincere :  the  ^nate  ^nddergy  obeyed  th^i 
.ummon.,and  as  soon  t^nihepatrirch  wa*  asBura  "Z^"  ^'I'^^^f.'/yh^^' 
gterated  the  successful  usurper  in  the  church  of  St.  John  the  Baptist.       G'bbon, 
JiX Amer.  Edit,  of  the  HisCof  the  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire.  Page 

*1rh^1i  W^n'SJt  Gregory  did  not  set  the  part  assigned  him  Vy 
mv  friend,  and  that  this  accusation  turns  out  to  be,  like  a  thousand 
others,  taken  up  at  second  hand,  without  examination  0^««jpician  of 
fttlsehiod  or  incorrectness,  against  the  pope,  a  "^^re  fabrication  wit^ 
out  .Tadow  of  foundation  in  history  1  What  will  th«  enlightened 
audience  now  say?  What  apology  is  my  fnmd  prepared  to  m^ 
for  iTving  unconiiously  led  them  into  error?  This  case  may  illustrate 
Si^  Others  that  are  similar,  and  I  beg  it  may  not  be  forgotten. 
Kimbleon,  Papin,  &e.  are  pamlleh,  the  pontiff  could  not  resist  the 
^Ulor ai  entL  people;  and  it  would  only  perpetuate  kwless  viok 
knee  and  disorder  to  ^contest  a  ckim  to  the  throne,  to  which  no  oue 
was  able  to  support  his  rival  pretensions.    The  pope  .seeing  that  the 

•  T«  tluilr  d.mor.  aaainst  Maurice,  the  people  of  Con.tantlnople  branded  bini 
wUh"lhi"i:.mt  orMrSonite  or  Mar.ioni.t;  J^.^^^-J. /-J^fn^S^  t**  ^^ 
cit  ouJl  iijul  Aproaih!  or  had  the  emperor  really  Usteaed  to  ««ne  otmux. 
teacher  of  tboM  ancieut  Gnostics  t 


DKBATS   OH   TUX 

pMpk,  who  had  <he  ri^t,  selected  themselres  t  new  rofer,  Hie  i 
true  lover  of  peaoeaiMl  frieiid  of  established  order,  cooffratolated  Phocaa 
IMI  Ua  election,  and  osed  the  language  of  scripture,  be  it  observed,  in 
hit  letter,  because  anarchy  was  at  an  end,  and  an  orthodox  and  gener- 
ous prince  substituted  on  the  throne  of  C.  P,  for  a  tyrant,  a  miser,  and 
a  suspected  Marcionite  heretic.  Mauritius  may  have  died  penitent^ 
but  he  reigned  without  love  for  his  subjects. 

We  were  spoken  to  of  the  president  of  the  U.  S.    He  has  the  saino 
fower  and  authority  as  Washington  had  while  the  constitution  of  the 
Mintry  endures.     And  as  long  as  the  constitution  of  the  church  en- 
iniw,  tlie  successors  of  Peter  have  the  authority  of  Peter.    If  there 
waa  ever  to  eome  a  time,  when  the  true  church  was  to  fail,  Jesus 
Christ  was  bound  by  his  wisdom  and  love  to  foretell  IL    If  it  was  his 
intention  to  forsake  the  church,  and  if  the  power  and  authorities  of  all 
the  regularly  constituted  orders  were  to  fail,  he  never  should  have 
given  It  the  promise  of  perpetual  endurance,  and  the  precise  period,  and 
all  the  differeot  circumstances  of  its  defection  should  have  been  more 
dearly  and  emphatically  revealed,  than  any  other  event  in  the  scrip- 
taie.    It  Is  needless  to  add  that  such  defection  is  not  foretold ;  but  on 
tlM  contrary  it  is  repeatedly  declared  by  the  Son  of  God.  that  his 
0hnreh  ahoold  stand  forever,  that  his  Holy  Spirit  should  abide  with  it 
all  daya,  that  the  gates  of  Hell  should  not  prevail  against  it.   What  la 
the  meaning  of  the  words  "the  gates  of  Hell  shall  not  prevail  against 
Itl**    In  the  east,  laws  were  enacted,  justice  administered,  and  the 
aages  and  people  assembled  for  deliberation  at  the  gates  of  the  cities. 
Hence  the  expression   denotes,  wisdom,   subtlety,   malice.     Again, 
when  a  city  was  Invaded  by  a  hostile  army,  the  hottest  (ightinor  was 
around  its  gates.     In  them  and  around  them,  were  all  the  energies  of 
the  conflicting  hosts  put  forth — and  on  the  issue  of  the  battle  was  sua- 
]iended  a  nation's  weal  or  woe.    Thus  by  the  gates  of  Hell  are  clearly 
meant,  all  the  craft  and  power  of  Hell,  the  malice  of  heresy  and  er- 
ror, the  force  and  violence  of  peraecution.    All  these  shall  rage  around 
the  church  in  vain,  for  Christ  is  In  the  citadel,  and  his  Holy  Spirit  is  the 
aentlnel  that  guards  Its  outposts  and  defences  from  being  overthrown 
iiy  error.     But  he  says  that  the  apostles  had  all  power  given  to  them 
— grant  it — ^but  what  was  the  nature  of  that  power  ?  what  was  its  ex- 
iHit  1     It  was  a  power  to  teach  all  nations.    The  weapon  of  their  war- 
ftte  was  not  carnal  but  B|ilrlti«al ;  **  for  our  wrestling,*'  says  St.  Paul, 
Bphes.  VI.  12. ^ia  not  against  flesh  and  blood,  but  against  principal itiea 
and  powers,  against  the  rulers  of  the  world  of  this  darkness,  against  the 
tpirlts  of  wickedness  in  the  high  places.**    *«  Behold,"  says  Christ,  "  I 
•end  yon  as  laraba  in  the  midst  of  wolves.    Carry  not  with  yon  scrip 
■or  staflT,  &c.    Be  not  solicitous  for  the  morrow,  what  you  shall  eat,  or 
wherewithal  you  shall  be  clothed.     Behold  the  lilies  of  the  fleld,  they 
■ow  not,  neither  do  they  spin — and  yet  your  Heavenly  Father  clotheth 
them — careth  for  them — how  much  more  ye,  &c.**     By  patience  they 
were  to  run  towards  the  fight  proposed  to  them,  and  by  patience  they  tri- 
Wiinhed  over  their  persecutors.    The  pope,  should  occasion  require, 
will  show  himself  the  faithful  imitator  of  these  heroic  models.     Were 
he  stript  to-morrow  of  all  external,  temporal  power  whatever,  and  a 
poor  wanderer  among  the  mountains  of  the  moon  in  Abyssinia,  he 
would  have  no  less  power,  and  would  be,  for  aught  I  know,  no  less 
ie<tpected|  thau  he  is  at  present.    His  chief  authority  is,  thank  God, 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    BELIOION. 


m 


•Qch  89  this  world  can  neither  give  nor  take  away.  It  was  given  for 
the  salvation  of  the  people  of  God,  and  as  lon^  as  there  is  a  soul  to  be 
■aved,  a  sheep  to  be  brought  back  to  the  fold,  or  a  spiritual  conquest 
achieved  for  the  glory  of  Christ,  and  the  praise  of  his  grace,  so  long 
•hall  that  power  survive ;  when  all  else  decays,  itself,  amidst  vicissi- 
tudes unchanged,  shall  flourish  in  immortal  youth. 

For  our  sakes,  in  this  distant  province  of  creation,  and  at  this  late  age, 
as  well  aa  for  those  who  saw  the  Word  made  flesh  conversing  among 
men,  was  this  commission  given  and  this  authority  conferred.  Our 
souls  were  no  less  dear  to  Christ  than  were  those  of  the  first  be- 
lievers of  glad  tidings — ^and  Cincinnati  was  the  rival  of  Jerusalem  In 
the  Saviors  love !  With  him  there  was  no  exception  of  persons — 
neither  past  nor  future.  He  provided  for  every  casualty  which  he 
foreknew  should  happen  in  the  lapse  of  ages — he  anticipated  every 
favorable  or  adverse  circumstance  that  should  affect  the  condition  of 
his  church,  and  with  diylne  wisdom  he  adapted  its  constitutions  to  the 
peculiar  exigencies  of  every  age  and  nation  and  individual  believer, 
until  we  reach  "the  consummation  of  the  world."  He  sent  his  apos- 
tles with  power  to  ordain  faithful  men,  who  should  in  their  turn  be  fit 
to  teach  others.  This  is  the  charge  that  St.  Paul  repeated  to  Titus, 
and  thus  has  the  succession  of  apostolic  teachers  been  continued  from 
nation  to  nation,  and  from  age  to  age,  the  church  gaining  in  one  region 
of  the  earth  what  she  had  lost  in  anotlier,  renewing  her  youth  like  the 
eagles,  increasing  her  members,  and  daily  transmitting  to  t:he  bright 
realms  of  heavenly  glory  innumerable  multitudes  of  her  children  of 
every  clime  and  tongue,  and  peculiarity  of  social  government  or  manners. 

The  apostles  exercised  various  functions — I  admit  iL  But  they 
substituted  the  deacons  to  wait  on  tables,  and  distribute  the  alms,  so 
do  their  successors  ;  Christ  gave  them  powers  adequate  to  every 
emergency. 

It  has  been  wrongly  asserted,  that  Moses  had  no  successor.  Joshua 
was,  in  one  important  branch,  his  successor,  for  it  devolved  on  hiin  to 
lead  the  people  into  the  land  of  promise,  and  without  this  consummation, 
the  ministry  of  Moses  would  have  been  in  vain ;  and  tliere  are  Joshuas 
now  whose  ofhce  it  is  to  lead  the  people  to  their  spiritual  Canaan— 
and  as  God  obeyed  the  voice  of  Joshua,  in  commanding  the  sun  to 
•taod  still,  so  he  now  obeys  the  voice  of  his  priests  making  snppli- 
eation  for  his  people.  Here  is  an  obvious  analogy  between  the  old 
tnd  the  new  covenants.  My  friend  argues  that,  because  Moses  had 
no  successor,  Peter  could  have  none,  and  the  apostles  none;  but  it  la 
clear  that  Moses  had  a  successor.  All  that  Moses  accomplished  would 
have  been  incomplete  without  a  succession  of  ministry  to  carry  on  the 
work  of  God  in  favor  of  his  people,  Israel.  This,  Eusebius  beauti- 
fully establishes,  p.  46.  So  by  thb  same  analogy,  it  is  necessary  that 
the  succession  of  an  apostolic  priesthood  should  he  continued  for  the  car- 
ry ing  on  of  the  christian  dispensation,  and  be  transmitted  down  from  gen- 
eration of  spiritual  guides  to  generation,  until  the^  shall  have  conducted 
all  the  people  of  God  to  the  Uue  land  of  promise,  where  I  trust  we  shall 
all  meet,  and  cease  to  dispute,  as  we  now  do,  like  little  children,  at 
the  imminent  risk  of  neglecting  the  weightier  points  of  the  law.  For 
myself,  I  am  heartily  sick  of  such  interminable  contention.  Here 
would  I  stop  and  suffer  the  matter  to  end  without  another  word,  if  the 
•ad  necessity  was  not  imposed  upon  me  of  defending  the  impugned 


t'll! 
if' 


..lii; 

.HI'.*'"  :l 


■I 


ii  WmmATU  oil  TBI 

liMta  nf  my  cliiiTch,  and  tlTiDg  with  my  Tolce  tlie  testimimy  wlilcli, 
with  the  dmne  tMifltance,  I  tliiMild  not  hedtate  to  smI  with  my  Mood, 
to  the  truthn  of  the  Romin  Catholic  (kith.  From  the  discham  of  this 
duty,  no  tine  believer,  still  more  no  minister  of  God,  should  shrink ; 
aiM  it  la  worthy  of  notice  thst,  with  all  the  lo^e  and  homil'ty  of  St. 
Paul,  he  shoald  hare  warned  his  disciple  Timothy,  and  still  more  the 
biiy  rfiie  fiiithfbl,  against  associating  with  "heretics."  I  never  nse 
Ihia  iford,  as  it  is  now  so  harshly  anderstood,  to  designate  those  who 
diiiir  from  me  in  religion ;  but  I  know  not  how  mnj  human  being  is  to 
dMermine  without  the  aid  of  a  competent  trihunal,  who  are  heretics, 
'ttiii  who  ate  not;  for  we  cannot  look  into  the  heart. 

1  am  told  that  an  English  divine  was  accustomed  humorously  to  de- 
ine  theHilBffmsin  this  way.  "  Orthodoiy  is  my  doiy  and  heterodoxy 
Is  yours.**  But  seriously,  what  being  on  earth  ean  look  into  the  secrets 
of  the  heart!  Who  was  to  determine  when  heresv  occurred  !  That 
it  existed  in  the  early  days  of  the  church  none  can  doubt.  The  apostles 
denounced  it.  They  delivered  its  authors  to  Satan  (of  whom  St.  Paul 
■ays,  are  Hymeneusand  Alexander  whom  I  have  delivered  to  Satan,  that 
they  may  learn  not  to  blasfiheme.  1st  Tim.  1.  SO.)  The  apostles  did 
■ot  suffer  theif  disciples  to  make  this  discrimination  for  themselves,  in 
deiance  of  the  express  word  of  Ood.  They  did  not  allow  every  man 
to  assert  the  ri^ht  of  private  judgment  on  scripture,  which  they  taught 
was  of  no  "private  interpretation.**  S  Peter,  1.  20.  The  very  form 
**«iiMlenfafMitng  lAtt /r«l**  exceedingly  strengthens  the  text.  Divisions 
wit  ever  exist.  They  are,  unfortunately,  as  nalural  to  depraved  man, 
at  viee ;  and  but  little,  if  at  all  less  fatal.  "  There  were  ako  faim 
frapld!i  mmng  Ike  pettpk,"  says  St.  Peter,  8d  Ep.  xi,  1,  even  m 
Mere  akaU  be  ammg  fow  h^ng  kmehert^  who  ekall  bring  in  §eei§  tf 
mrHiimH  and  again  v.  10  and  If,  «  HMy /wir  noi  h  bring  in  eed^ 
blaspheming  those  things  that  they  know  not,  promising  their  disciples 
llbirtf,  whereas  they  themselves  are  the  slaves  of  corruption.'*  T^ese 
are  f^^ntains  without  water,  clouds  tossed  with  whirlwinds,  or  ss  St. 
Jnde  says,  v.  13,  ^*  raging  waves  of  the  sea,  foaming  out  of  their 
own  confusion,  wandering  stars  to  whom  the  storm  of  daricness  is  re- 
served for  ever.**  Who  would  trust  his  safety  in  a  perilous  voyage 
to  an  unskilful  pilot  I  Who  would  risk  the  horrors  of  the  deep  without 
^Mirt  or  compass  I  Has  God  abandoned  his  children  sc  far  as  to  leave 
them  a  prey  to  every  innovator,  every  wolf  in  sheep*s  clothing!  Is 
there  no  ark  of  safety  for  man,  while  the  waters  of  error  overspread 
the  ear<hl  Yes,  my  friends,  there  is.  It  la  the  church.  Thst  ark 
alone  can  save  the  worid.  "  Whosoever/*  says  St.  John,  3d  Ep.  9, 
10,  "rovolteth  and  continueth  not  in  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  hath  not 
God.  If  any  man  come  to  you  and  bring  not  this  doctrine,  receive 
him  not  into  the  house,  nor  say  to  him,  •  God  speed  you.*  For  he  that 
tayeth  •God  speed  you,*  comraunicateth  with  his  wicked  works.** 
This  admonition,  we  understand  to  he  directed  against  false  religions 
ltd  Ihlse  teachera.  It  does  not  forbid  charity,  which  wo  owe  to  all 
wen,  and  particulariy  the  erring;  for  whom,  we  are  taught  it  to  he  our 
doty  to  pray,  that  they  may  happily  come  to  the  knowledge  of 
tinth. 

I  confess  that,  for  my  part,  I  cannot  practise  this  doctrine  literally, 
nor  refuse  to  salute  one  who  differs  from  me  in  faith.  I  retain  my 
«WD  convictions  and  eschew  his  errors.    The  apostles  did  differently, 


10MA.N   CATHOLIC    RBLIOION. 

and  who  will  presume  to  say,  they  were  not  more  enlightened  than  we  I 
When  St.  John  met  Cerinthus  (who  denied  the  divimty  of  Christ)  in 
the  baths  of  Ephesus,  he  ran  out  saying  that  he  was  afraid  the  baths 
would  fall  upon  him.  And  when  his  disciple  St.  Polycarp  met  Mar- 
cion,  in  the  streete  of  Rome,  he  refused  to  salute  him.  "  Do  you  not 
know  me  !'*  said  Marcion.  "  1  do  know  you,"  replied  Polycarp,  to  be 
the  oldest  son  of  the  Devil.'*  This  shows  the  dread  of  religious  inno- 
vators entertained  hy  the  apostles  of  Christ  and  by  their  disciples,  the 
dangerous  result  of  heresy.— [Time  expired.] 

Half-fad  II  o'doek,  A,  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises— 

I  am  sorry  that  I  cannot  sympathize  with  the  gentleman  in  his  em- 
barrassmen^  occasioned,  as  he  alleges,  in  being  obliged  to  respond 
promptly  to  objections  to  his  doctnnes,  which,  he  says,  he  cannot  anU- 
iipate.  ^Sofaras  he  is  placed  in  the  Predicament  of  a  respondent  to 
my  allegations,  he  has  no  one  to  blame  buthiniself.  When  arrang- 
inff  the  preliminaries  as  to  the  mode  in  which  ^hw  discussion  was  to 
be  conducted,  the  gentleman  perseverinffly  insisted  that  I  should  lead 
tlie  way,  commencing  every  session ;  and  that,  whether  the  proposiUon 
were  affirmative  or  negauve,  he  must  always  respond.  It  was  a  fine 
nua  nan  with  him,  that  he  should  always  have  the  last  word.  I 
lould,  as  an  apology  for  giving  him  such  an  advantage,  »"fo™  ?»y  »"- 
dience,  that  on  no  other  condition  would  he  consent  to  meet  me.  It,  how- 
ever, he  sincerely  dislikes  the  arrangement,  I  am  willing  to  alter  it, 
and  change  places  with  him  to-morrow.  The  affirmative,  should,  m 
all  right,  and  by  universal  usage,  open,  and  the  respondent  follow,  in 

*I  regard  this  discussion,  my  friends,  as  a  very  serious  and  importent 
affair,  involving  in  it  the  very  best  interests  of  the  whole  community. 
I  do  not  appear^here  to  speak  for  myself  alone  in  behalf  of  Protestant- 
ism, or  to  you  alone.  I  speak  for  my  contemporaries,  and  for  the  great 
omie  of  truth ;  and  I  am  glad  for  their  sake  that  this  debate  is  imme- 
diately  to  go  to  record.  I  must,  therefore,  give  as  connected  a  form 
as  circumstances  will  permit  to  my  argument.  For  this  reason,  I 
passed  over  some  things  in  the  speech  of  yesterday  that  I  ni'ght  fimsh 
my  first  argument  this  morning.  I  unfortunately,  however,  forgot  to 
notice  them  before  1  commenced  my  second  proposition. 

I  will  now  recapitulate.—  .  tmru^,^  w«>a  i\>» 

The  quesUon  was  asked  me,  yesterday  evening,  "Where  was  the 
true  church  before  the  time  of  the  Greek  schism  1'*  I  ot>«f^«^';J" 
morning,  in  answer,  that  my  having  shown  the  Greek  church  to  be  the 
•cnior,  or  the  original  of  the  Roman,  did  not  necessarily  involve  the 
idea  thai  the  Greek  ehureh  wa»  at  the  time  if  eeparaitonthe  trueVathohc 
dmrch.  To  this  answer  the  gentleman  has  not  replied ;  but  yet  jeiter- 
ates  the  question.  His  assumption  of  a  church  of  nations  with  a  poli- 
tical hearf,  having  always  existed,  so  confounds  him  that  ^^^  Jk! 
a  church  without  a  pope,  or  a  national  establishment.  I  miffht  ask, 
in  reolv  where  was  the  church  before  the  days  of  Coustantine  T 

7e  carhowever,  show  that  from  the  eartiest  times  there  has  ex- 
isted  a  people  whom  no  man  can  remember,  that  have  earnestly  and 
consiste'Ttl?  c^^^        for  the  true  faiOi  once  «>f -/^f^^^^^^ 
If  he  requires  me  to  put  my  finger  on  the  page  of  history  on  which  » 

r3  ^ 


AH 


■>i'n  A  w    nw   »wtM  M 
UBiIATa    Un    THJi 


iMcrilied  the  commeneemmit  of  the  degeneracy  of  the  Roman  diocese 
Unmi  the  true  failh,  I  will  turn  hack  to  aboat  the  year  of  our  Lord  250. 
Then  the  controrersy  betm*een  Gomeliua  and  Novatian,  about  the 
IMifiMie  of  Rome,  embraced  the  points  at  issue,  which  separated  the 
litfi  ehurch  from  that  which  was  then  griei onsly  contaminated  with 
iHiir  and  Immorality.  It  was,  indeed,  a  controYersy  about  the  pority 
Iff  ccnMlinion  and  discipline,  rather  than  about  articles  of  doctrine. 
And  it  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  such  was  the  principal  issue  made  at 
that  time,  althouGrh  the  doctrine  of  Christianity  will  not  lonir  continue 
pure  in  a  degenemte  community.  ^ 

I  hare  here,  before  me,  Eusebins,  the  oldest  of  ecclesiastical  histo- 
rians, who  informs  us  that  Novatus  and  his  party  were  called 
Ctdkari  or  FuriUtm,  And,  although  he  appears  greatly  incensed  a» 
gainst  Novatus  and  his  party,  he  can  record  no  evil  against  them  ex- 
cept their  **  unekaritabiefie$»,'**  in  refusing  to  commune  with  those  of 
Immoral  and  doubtful  character. 

The  fentieman  hat  ^iven  yon  Att  definition  of  orthodoxy  and  hete- 
rodoxy :  mtf  definition  is— the  itrong  party  is  the  orthodox,  and  the 
weak  party  is  the  heterodox, 

1  bold  In  my  hand  one  of  the  latest  and  best  historians — Wadding 
ton.    My  learned  opponent  has  already  introduced  him  to  your  ao- 

Juaintance.  He  is  a  Fellow  of  Trinity  college,  Cambridge,  and 
'iehendary  of  Ferrinff,  in  the  cathedral  church  of  Chichester.  The 
iccouni  he  gives  of  these  reformers  is  sustained  by  Jones  and  ottier 
ecclesiastical  historians.  I  prefer  Waddington  for  his  brevity  and 
ptivpicuity.    He  says : 

**  We  may  coiwlude  with  some  notic«  of  the  Mct  of  th*  Nciv^atkos  who  were 
itignnlited  st  the  time  both  as  schismattca  and  heretics;  but  who  may  perbaps 
be  more  properly  considered  us  the  earliest  body  of  ecclesiastical  retormert 
They  arose  at  Rome  about  the  vear  250,  A.  D.  and  subsisted  until  the  fifth  ceo 
Imew  thnmihowt every  part  of  Christendom.  Novatian,  a  presbyter  of  Rome  wai 
•  imh  of  ^at  tmleBtsSnd  learning,  and  of  character  so  austere,  that  he  nas  uo. 
willing,  under  any  circumstances  of  contrition,  to  re-aduiit  those  who  had  beev 
once  separated  from  the  communion  of  the  church.  And  this  severity  he  would 
have  eitended  not  only  to  those  who  bad  fallen  by  deliberate  transsression,  but 
even  to  inch  m  had  mmde  a  forced  compromise  of  their  &lth  nnder  the  terrors  uf 

Crsecution.  fie  considered  the  christian  church  as  a  socletv,  where  virtue  and 
MCence  reigned  univenally,  and  refused  any  longer  to  aclinowledce  as  mem- 
lieta  of  it,  those  who  had  once  degenerated  into  unrighteousness.  This  endea- 
vor to  revive  the  spotless  moral  purity  of  the  primitive  faith  was  found  inconsis* 
lent  with  the  corruptions  even  of  that  early  age;  it  was  regarded  with  suspicion 
hv  the  leading  prelates,  as  a  vain  and  visionary  scheme;  and  those  rigid  princi- 
plet  which  had  characterked  and  sanctified  the  church  in  the  first  century,  were 
abandoned  to  the  prolSeiaton  of  schismatic  sectaries  in  the  third.** 

This  ■miidi  i  little  like  Protestantism.  Our  author  proceeds  : 
**Fiom  a  nvlew  of  what  baa  been  written  on  this  subject,  some  truths  may  be 
derived  of  considerable  historical  importance;  the  following  are  among  them  :— 
I.  In  the  midst  of  perpetual  disaent  and  occasional  controversy,  a  steady  and  dis- 
tinguishable line,  both  in  doctrine  and  practice,  was  maintamed  by  the  early 
ehurch,  and  its  efforts  against  those,  whom  it  called  heretics,  were  tealons  and 
peiaeveriact  and  for  the  moat  part  consistent.  Its  contests  were  fought  with  the 
*aifOrdof  Im  ioirit,*  with  the  amis  of  reason  anil  eloquence;  and  as  they  were 
always  nnalleMied  by  personal  oppression,  so  were  they  most  effectually  success- 
ful— sneetMil,  not  in  estabrnhin^a  nominal  unity,  nor  silencing  the  expression 
ol  private  opinion,  but  in  maintaining  the  purity  of  the  faith,  in  preserving  the 
■llachment  of  the  great  majority  of  tie  behevers,  and  in  contigning,  either  to  im- 
.wadialia  dlspapite,  or  early  neglect,  all  the  uiijcriptural  doctrines  which  were 
ocemte^y  amjed  against  it. 


BOMAN   CATHOUC    MELIGIOff. 

Other  troths  are  here  stated,  as  consequent  from  the  premises.  1 
will  however  for  the  satisfaction  of  my  Episcopalian  friends  read  what 
follows,  in  this  connection  on  church  government. 

••There  fias  yet  no  dissent  on  the  subject  of  church  government.  It  was  uni- 
▼ersally  and  undisputably  Epiteopal ;  even  the  reformer  Noyatian,  after  hM  «- 
nubbn  from  the  cfcurch,  Msomed  the  direction  of  his  own  ng.d  sect  omler  the  t^ 
fie  of  bishop;  and  if  any  dissatisfaction  had  existed  as  to  the  established  method 
of  directrng^lhrchurch^it  would  certainly  have  ^i-plajed  .tse  f  on  the  cK:c«jon 
of  a  schism,  which  entirt  iy  respected  matters  of  practice  and  disciplme.       Hut. 

These  furitans  or  reformers  spread  all  over  the  world,  and  contim- 
ed  to  oppose  the  pretensions  of  those  who,  from  being  the  major  par- 
ty, claimc-d  to  be  the  Catholic  or  only  church.  They  continued  under 
the  name  of  Novalians  for  more  than  two  centuries ;  but  finally  were 
merged  in  the  Donatists,  who,  indeed,  are  the  same  people  under  ano- 
ther name.  These  Donatists  were  a  very  large  and  prosperous  wimmii. 
nity.  We  read  of  379  Donatist  bishops  in  one  Afncan  conncU.  Ut 
these  Donatists  the  same  historian  deposes:  „r  *„»k 

-The  Donatists  have  never  been  charged  with  the  slightert  shpwof  trutH 
with  any  error  of  doctrine,  or  any  defect  in  church  governiuent  ordincij^Xme^or 
Tny  depravity  of  moral  practice  ;  th.y  aerecd  m  ^rZ^^^f^l  V^JZ^^^. 
iaries,  except  ooe-they  did  not  acknowledge  as  legitimate  the  ministiy  of  the 
African  chureh.  but  coniidered  their  o«n  body  to  be  the  true,  uncornipted,  uni- 

Mafkit.  The  Donatists  considered  «*«>  own  body  to  he  ike  true^ 
meorrupted,  umverml  ekurek!    "It  is  quite  clear,"  our  author  pfo- 

« It  is  qnite  clear, that  they  pushed  their  schism  to  veiy  great  extremities,  even 

to  that  of  rejecting  the  coiimunion  of  »»^  T^« ''«'«/°  .^''^^^^Prj^ff Jr.* 
church  which^  they  called  fiilse  ;  but  this  was  the  extent  of  therr  spiritual  offence, 

even  from  the  assertions  of  tlieir  enemies."     fVad.  Hut,  p.  lb*. 

The  Donatists,  in  some  two  centuries,  were  amalgamated  with  ine 

Faulicians.    They,  too,  were  called  Puritans.  Jones,  who  has  been  at 

the  greatest  pains  to  give  their  history,  gives  the  following  account  of 

#t|A|V|     • 

•♦  About  the  year  660.  a  new  sect  arose  in  the  east,  under  the  name  of  PAUU- 
CUNS,  which  is  justly  entitled  to  our  attention. 

"  In  Mananalil  an  obscure  town  in  thevicini^of  Somosata,  a  !H*"on  of  the 
name  of  Constantine  entertained  at  his  house  a  deacon,  who  hjvmg  beena  pris- 
oner among  the  Mahometans,  was  returning  from  Syria.  ;?^t»*'»«^>^j'«2^*l*» 
carried  awty  captive.    From  this  passing  stranger  Constantme  received  the  pre- 
cions  gift  of  the  New  Testament  in  its  original  language   which  even  at  this  car- 
rirfod.  was  w»  concealed  from  the  vulpr,  that  Peter  S.culus.  to  whom  we  owe 
moWourinformation  on  the  history  oPthe  Pan  Icians.  te  Is  us  the  f  "t  ^c™?*" 
of  a  Catholic,  when  he  was  advised  to  read  the  bible  was.  "it  is  no    lawful  for  u. 
pro&ne  persons  to  read  those  sacred  writings,  but  for  the  priests  onlv.       Indeed. 
Ee  gross  Ignorance  whichpervaded  Europe  at  that  time,  rendered  the  generali^r 
cf  tie  people  incapable  of^readin^  that  or  any  other  book ;  but  «^««^.*>,f J^Jj 
laity  wfto  could  read,  were  dissua  j^d  bv  their  religious  guides  from  meddling  wrth 
the  Bible.    Constantine  however,  made  the  best  use  ofthe  deacon  s  present-be 
studied  the  New  Testament  with  unwearied  assiduity-and  "Of^  P*^'''"^'''*^  If* 
writings  of  the  apostle  Pinl  from  which  he  at  length  endeavored  to  deduce  a  system 
of  do?trinc  anJworship.    •  He  investigated  the  creed  of  primitive  Christianity, 
•ays  Gibbon,  •und  whatever  might  be  tl^  success,  a  Protestant  reader  '^'{J  W»»'«* 
tbi  spirit  of  the  enquiry.'    The%nowledge  to  which  Constantme  ^'^^^f  »f  ™'.»»: 
der  the  divine  blessing  enabled  to  attain.  Eegladly  communicated  to  o}**.*"  "O'JJJ 
him  and  a  christian  church  was  collected.     In  a  l.ttle  time,  »«^*,'^   •°^»\.^""^« 
Lse  among  them  qualified  fortheworkof  the  nunistry;  and  several  otb^^^^ 
«s  were  cofiected  throughout  Armenia  and  Capoaaocia.     It  apF«"fr^^ 
wkole  of  their  history,  to  have  been  a  leadmg  ol-«ct  with  Constantme  and  hu 


pi 


ef» 


BaiAm  oil'  TB'H 


BOXAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


69 


bntlhMB  to  rr  stow  is  6r  utiMWiible  flie  profession  of  christianitj  to  all  hi  prm- 
iUf  •  ■iMiilicitv."    Jmm*  MmL  CkriOim  ekh,  p.  239. 

AfBiii : 

•^Tlic  Paulkian  teachers/' mjt  Gibbon,  **were  distin^ished  only  by  ihmr 
aeriiititnl  aaniea,  by  the  modest  title  of  their  felluw  pil^iiut ;  bj  the  austerity 
of  lleir  lives,  their  leal  and  Inowledfe,  and  the  credit  of  some  extraordinary 
fill  of  the  Holy  Spirit  But  they  were  incapable  of  desirlnr,  or  at  least,  of  ob- 
taiaifig  tlie  wealth  and  honors  of  the  Catholic  prelacy.  Such  aati<-christian  prido 
Cbey  stronf  ly  censured." — Id,  ib.  y.  240. 

I  might  read  almost  to  the  same  effect  from  Waddington  and  D« 
Pin.  True  they  are  called  heretiet  by  thdse  who  call  themselves  C»- 
Ihoiic  ami  us  heietics ;  but  what  does  this  prove  ! 

Until  tlifi  appearance  of  the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses,  these  Pro 

•ttonts  continued  to  oppose  the  church  of  nations  in  the  east,  and  in 

lliewest,  until  atone  time  they  claimed  the  title  of  Catholic.    We 

lead  of  hundreds  of  bishops  attending  the  different  councils  in  which 

tbey  met  to  oppose  the  violent  assaults  of  their  enemies. 

It  Is  sometimes  difficult  to  say  which  were  the  more  numerous  party, 
llifMe  in  communion  with  the  Cathari,  or  Puritans,  sometimes  called 
Viovatians,  sometimes  Donatists,  sometimes  Paulicians,  sometimes 
WiMwses;  but  always,  in  fact,  Protestants. 

The  spirit  of  true  religion  seems  to  have  fled  from  Rome  from  tfao 
first  anpearance  of  the  Novatians.  The  first  schism  at  Rome  acknow 
Mged  and  recorded  by  the  Roman  Catholic  historians,  is  that  which 
occurred  at  the  election  of  Cornelius  over  Novatns.  Hence  Novatos 
is  called  the  first  anti-pope.  Du  Pin  and  Barronius  amply  testify  of 
the  violence  by  which  St.  Peter's  chair  was  often  filled  with  a  vicai 
aller  this  schism.  In  the  election  of  Damasus  many  were  killed  in  the 
churches  of  Rome.  One  hundred  and  thirty  four  persons,  beaten 
to  death  by  clubs,  were  carried  out  of  a  single  house  at  this  election. 
Hid  Ih®  Holy  Spirit  any  thing  to  do  in  thus  filling  the  chair  of  St.  P©- 
ter  with  a  vicar  of  Christ  I  Is  the  church  which  permits  such  things 
and  which  has  bf  en  sustained  by  such  means,  the  true  church  of  God  ? 
Is  the  person  thus  elected,  the  supremo  head  of  Christ's  church— 
the  proper  vicar  of  Christ! !  May  we  not  then  say  that  the  spirit  of 
God  on  that  day,  had  departed  from  Romel  And  may  we  not  add, 
from  the  documents  before  us,  that  if  there  be  any  truth  in  history, 
we  have  found  a  succession  of  witnesses  for  the  ancient  faith  against 
Rome,  from  the  days  of  the  first  schism  till  the  present  hour  1 

There  is  but  another  point  in  the  speech  of  my  opponent,  to  which  I 
will  now  respond.  I  called  on  him  to  explain  the  diflferencc  between 
the  claim  of  the  title  of  pope,  or  universal  fatlier,  (as  St.  Gregory  op- 
posed it,)  and  the  same  claim  as  now  maintained  by  the  head  of  the 
chuich.  The  name  pope,  indeed,  has  in  modem  times,  much  changed 
its  meaning;  for  once  it  was  applied  to  all  bishops,  and  is  now  ap- 
plied to  every  priest  in  the  Greek  church.  But  when  has  the  title 
••universal  father,"  been  changed!  He  alluded,  in  reply,  to  the 
sehtsra  between  the  Greek  church  and  the  Roman  church.  The  Greek 
cinfch,  it  seems,  would  not  allow  that  the  ordinances  of  religion  with- 
out their  sanction,  were  validly  administered.  Is  not  that  the  very 
plea  of  Rome  at  this  hour!  Does  she  not  say,  that  the  bishops  and 
clergy  of  the  English  church  are  all  laymen,  because  that  church  se- 
parated from  the  Roman  church ;  and  that  all  the  authority  she  had 
If  on  hei  has  been  since  revoked  by  the  authority  that  gave  it  I    How 


oAen  arc  we  told  that  the  pope  has  the  power  of  resuming  all  anthority 
given  him — that  he  can  create,  and  afterwards  destroy  1  that  whatever 
eeclesiastical  power  he  gives,  he  can  take  away ;  and  that  therefore 
all  heretics  excommunicated  and  anathematized  have  no  power  left  to 
perform  the  ordinances  of  religion!  The  ground  upon  which  the  gen- 
tleman stands  as  to  his  defence  of  the  authority  of  the  pope,  is  precise- 
ly the  ground  of  Gregory's  opposition  to  the  title,  as  claimed  by  Boni- 
^ce  III.  if  I  can  understand  his  attempt  to  explain  it. 

But  I  must  advert,  before  I  sit  down,  to  a  single  point  on  which  I 
touched  in  my  speech  of  this  morning,  viz.  that  of  the  councils.  Tlie  ' 
gentleman  asks,  did  not  Sylvester  the  pope  preside  in  the  first  general 
council  by  his  legate  !  I  affirm  that  he  cannot  show  documents  to 
prove  that  fact.— Nay,  let  him  show,  if  he  can,  that  the  first  seven 
councils  were  called  by  the  bishops  of  Rome,  or  thai  his  legates  were 
there  to  preside. 

What  would  the  gentleman  prove  by  the  fact,  if  it  be  a  fact,  that  a 
Roman  bishop  presided  over  one  of  these  councils  !  That,  therefore, 
they  were  Roman  councils  !  How  would  such  logic  pass  with  us  with 
regard  to  the  house  of  representatives  !  His  argument  runs  thus  :  Mr. 
Henry  Clay  was  once  speaker  of  that  house,  Mr.  Clay  is  from  Ken- 
tucky, therefore,  the  house  of  representatives  were  all  Kentuckiam  ! 
This  would  be  exactly  the  pith  of  the  logic  we  have  heard. 

My  opponent  admits  the  history  of  the  first  seven  councils  which  I 
have  given  to  be  correct :  but  explains  it  by  asserting  that  all  the  busi- 
ness was  eastern.  But  there  were  western  heresies^  as  well  as  eastern, 
and  western  business  as  well  as  eastern  transacted  in  these  councils. 
I  therefore  object  to  his  exposition  of  that  matter.  It  would  have  been 
impolitic  on  his  exposition  to  call  together  eastern  men  to  decide 
upon  eastern  heresies.  They  ought  to  have  sent  western  men,  who 
would  have  been  more  impartial  judges.  But  he  has  not  yet  adduced 
one  document,  showing  that  these  councils  were  called  for  such  purpo- 
ses, or  that  the  east  only  was  concerned  in  these  q  estions. 

On  the  prefix  ^^  Catholic^^  to  the  epistles,  the  ^ntleman  did  not 
hear  me,  or  did  not  apprehend  my  meaning.  The  argument  is  not  a- 
bout  its  afi/»^7y  but  its  authority!  He  has  not  proved,  and  cannot 
prove  that  it  was  so  prefixed  in  the  first  ages,  nor  that  it  was  ever  so 
applied  by  any  inspired  writer.  Having  brought  no  documents  to 
prove  this,  his  reasoning  is  wholly  irrelevant. 

But  you  have  been  treated,  my  friends,  to  a  feast  from  the  •*  Baptid 
Banner,'*'^  one  of  the  party  ephemerals  opposed  to  reformation.  Un- 
fortunately for  the  cause  of  religion,  every  age  has  produced  a  crop  of 
these  special  pleaders  for  party  tenets.  Many  such  a  banner  was  un- 
furled against  Martin  Luther,  John  Calvin,  John  Wesley  and  all  re- 
formers r  for  they  were  all  heretics  and  controversialists.  Indeed  thers 
never  was  a  good  man  on  earth  who  vras  not  a  controversialist.  From 
the  days  of  Abel  and  Noah  till  the  present  hour,  the  friends  of  truth 
have  been  heretical  and  controversial.  But  what  has  the  Baptist  Ban- 
ner to  do  with  tne  present  points  at  issue  !  Is  the  gentleman  so  hard 
presided  as  to  form  such  alliances,  to  deliver  himself  or  cause  from  ruin  ! 
I  trust  he  will  either  keep,  or  be  kept  to  the  question  in  debate,  and 
leave  Protestants  to  settle  their  own  controverBies.— [Time  ex- 
pired.] 


1© 


B: 


PumcEixri 


IMBATB  Oil  VBM 


MW$i9€  0'  clochf  JH* 


BOMAN   CATHOLIC   SBUGION. 


4 


I  dimffat  W0  should  be  placed  under  considerable  obligations  to  my 
HieMi,  for  patting  his  finger  upon  the  historic  page  that  reconlt  tbo 
day  and  data  of  Uie  anoitacy  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church  from  the 
true  and  holy  Apoetolie  church,  with  to  much  precision.  But  now  we 
are  adjourned  baek  nearly  1000  years,  and  yet  nothing  more  definite 
than  a  **some  time  about  the  year  35^!*'  Some  time  about!  He 
doee  not  tell  us  whether  it  was  m  one  year,  or  another,  that  the  church 
began  to  be  corrupt.  It  wai  lonie  liiiie  dkmOt  and  so  on.  About  this 
time,  it  seems,  the  Nofatiaot  seprated  from  the  church— -well,  Paul 
foresaw  that  such  events  woula  occur  in  the  church's  history-^e 
ibiisaw  that  ^  rsYeoous  wolves  would  enter  the  fold ;"  that  dissensions 
would  exist,  at  all  successive  periods,  to  the  end  of  tune— that  every 
day  new  heretics  would  start  up,  who  would  denyihe  truth,  introduce 
false  doctrine^  and  trouble  the  people  of  God.  The  Novatians  wero 
one  of  these  sects— and  what  did  Aey  teach  t  Why  the  most  levell- 
ing and  horrible  doetrines;  among  others,  the  doctrine  that  a  convert 
to  Christianity,  who,  in  times  of  peril  and  temptation,  nay  even  when 
t^mpdkd  hy  physical  fmx^  should  forsake  his  creed,  could  never  be 
restored,  no  matter  how  sincerely  penitent.  Who  that  feels  his  frailty 
and  knows  that  his  heart  in  an  evil  hour  might  stray  from  duty,  does 
not  revolt  at  such  a  doctrine,  that  for  one  offence  would  cot  him  off* 
forever!  God  dealt  not  so  with  Adam,  nor  Christ  with  Peter,  when 
at  the  voice  of  a  woman,  and  in  an  evil  hour,  even  Am  strong  heart 
failed  him.  He  admitted  him  to  mercy,  received  him  back  to  his 
bosom,  and  made  him  the  rock  of  his  church. 

But  if  all  heretics  are  right,  and  this  among  the  number— if  the 
ehufch  was  wrong  in  separating  herself  from  these  men — if  it  is  her 
duty  to  say  to  the  upholder  of  false  doctrine  "all  hail,"  you  areas 
free  from  error,  as  incorrupt  and  immaculate,  as  we  are,  come  partake 
with  us,  we  are  of  one  communion ;  the  rule  should,  according  to  the 
gentleman's  logic,  wmrk  hath  loa^,  and  Rome  has  as  good  a  right  as 
anyother  to  be  called  the  chuseh  of  Christ  On  the  other  hand,  if  the 
Hovatians  were  right,  as  he  says  they  were,  in  excluding  othera,  the 
church  was  ri^t  in  excluding  them.  The  speech  of  herettcs,  St.  Paul 
tells  us,  2d  Tim.  ii.  17,  spreadeth  like  a  cancer;  he  elsewhere  says, 
that  evil  communication  corrupts  good  mannera ;  and  the  Pagans  wei« 
mot  insensible  to  the  wisdom  of  the  distich^ 

**  Principiit  ohttft ;  Mro  medicina  pwrtttir 
••Coin  nrnla  per  loims  kvaluere  raoraf." 

Mjr  firieiid  must  have  fofgotlen  his  argument  of  this  morning,  when 
Im  aiid  that  the  church  of  the  living  G(xl  should  include  none  but  the 
■nreand  holy.  If  this  be  true,  we  must  all  give  it  up }  for  who  is  holy  f 
Which  of  us  can  lay  his  hand  upon  his  heart  and  say  I  am  without 
•in  I  No,  we  are  only  holy  in  acknowledging  our  sinfulness  and  guilt 
in  the  sight  of  God,  with  humility  aad  prayer.  ••  If  we  say  we  have 
no  sin,  we  deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us!  If  we  say 
we  have  not  sinned,  we  make  him  a  liar,  and  his  word  is  not  in  us.  If 
we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgiTe  us  our  sins,  and  to 
^ear  us  from  all  iniquity.**  Si.  John,  ifp.  If  such  be  the  gentleman's  ie» 
fulsitioiis,  there  can  be  no  church  of  Ch  rist  In  this  erring  world.  Them 
h  none  pure  from  defilement,  says  Job,  and  all  are  included  as  the 


•bleets  of  divine  displeasure,  from  which  only  the  blood  of  Christ, 
with  faith,  repentance  and  good  works,  can  save  us.  If  the  gentleman 
insists  on  applying  a  test  which  would  require  absolute  perfection  to 
enable  us  to  endure  it,  there  is  no  such  holiness,  that  I  am  aware  of, 
exhibited  in  this  probationary  state.  My  friend  may  feel  a  proud  con- 
sciousness that  he  is  a  happy  instance  of  its  existence,  but  for  my  part, 
I  cannot,  I  should  not  think  it  safe  to  lay  the  flattering  unction  to  my 
soul.  I  would  advise  no  man  to  do  so,  while  the  great  St.  Paul  com* 
mands  us  to  work  out  our  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling;  and  tells 
us,  he  chastised  his  own  body,  lest  while  he  preached  to  othera  he 
himself  **  should  become  a  reprobate,**  Ist.  Cor.  ix.  27.  It  is  our  duty 
to  acknowledge  that  we  are  frail  and  sinful  mortals  even  like  the  rest 
of  men.  Establish  a  contrary  rule,  and  pride  digs  one  abyss  after 
another  beneath  our  feet,  and  there  will  not  be  lel\  one  virtuous  feeling, 
one  sound  principle  upon  which  we  can  take  our  stand  to  make  a 
last  appeal  to  heaven  for  mercy !  When  Christ  empowered  the  church 
to  throw  her  nets  into  the  sea  of  human  life,  as  the  apostles  did  into 
the  lake,  she  gathered  into  it  fishes,  both  good  and  bad ;  when  the  nets 
are  hauled  ashore,  the  good  fish  will  be  selected  and  the  bad  thrown 
back  into  the  sea.  So  will  it  be  at  the  end  of  the  world.  The  angels 
of  God  will  come  forth  and  select  the  elect  from  the  reprobate — they 
will  gather  the  wheat  into  the  gamer,  but  the  tares  they  will  burn 
with  unquenchable  fire.  The  Catholic  church  with  a  consciousness  of 
man*8  true  condition  in  this  life,  and  a  liberality  which  does  her  honor, 
and  which,  all  agree,  ought  to  belong  to  the  fold  of  Christ,  permits  all  to 
join  in  her  religious  festivals  and  exterior  communion  who  profess  the 
same  faith,  and  are  willing  to  submit  to  her  decisions  as  her  children. 

But  mark  the  distinction  between  the  body  and  the  soul  of  the  church, 
all  who  profess  the  true  faith,  assist  at  the  same  religious  exercises 
and  obey  the  same  pastors,  belong  to  the  body  of  the  church  and  are 
therefore  numbered  among  her  children ;  but  to  faith  and  exterior  com- 
munion of  which  alone  man  can  take  cognizance,  must  be  added  hope  and 
love  and  grace  with  God,  that  we  may  belong  to  the  soul  of  the  church. 
Of  the  latter  the  church  does  not  undertake  to  decide.  This  she  leaves 
to  God  who  alone  can  see  the  heart.  She,  herself,  judges  not  the  in- 
scrutable things  of  the  spirit  of  a  man,  but  contents  herself  with  know- 
ing and  teaching  that  nothing  can  escape  the  piercing  and  all-seeing 
eye  of  God,  who  will  render  to  every  man  according  to  his  works,  on 
that  day  when  the  hope  of  the  hypocrite  shall  perish.  Hence,  as  long 
as  one  of  her  membera  disqualifies  not  himself  for  the  communion  of 
the  ftiihful  by  flagrant  impiety  notorious  depravity,  or  scandalous 
excess,  she  rejects  him  not;  but  like  that  charity  of  which  St.  Paul 
speaks,  1st  Cor.  xiii.  "is  patient,  is  kind,  thinketh  no  evil,  r^joiceth 
not  in  iniquity,  but  rejoiceth  with  the  truth,  believeth  all  things,  hopetli 
all  things,  endureth  all  things,  with  modesty  admonishing  men,  if  per- 
adventure  God  may  give  them  repentance.** 

The  gentleman  quoted  from  Waddington  the  history  of  the  Nova- 
tians. He  says,  they  continued,  how  long  I  know  not,  but  till! 
(forget  not  the  word,)  iill  they  merged  in  the  sect  of  Donatists.  The 
expressive  word  till  is  enough.  There  is  no  such  fatal  and  termiuatinst 
woni  in  Catholic  history.  The  Catholic  church  is  universal,  and  not 
sectarian.  It  Is  perpetual  in  duration,  and  is  not  merged  as  one  wave 
of  error  is  merged  in  or  obliterated  by  another.    The  gentleman  asserts. 


>.9i 


n 


DEBATE   ON   THE 


.1 


I 


t 


iwt  Ih©  Donatisto  did  not  differ  from  the  Novatians.  This  is  incor- 
mst.  Th«  Donatiits  fell  from  schism  into  enors  which  the  No- 
latiaiia  hid  mwm  adopted.  They  employed  the  ^'»avagc  Cireum^ 
tMom,'"  as  the  proteatant  historian  Waddinftoi  ealls  them,  to 
Milage  churches,  murder  Catholics,  and  perpetrate  other  acts  of 
Sarbarily  unheard  of  amonjj  the  meek  followers  of  Jesoa  Chnal. 
What,  too,  will  my  friend  say  to  the  uncontrollable  propensity  to  spi* 
aide,  which  they  were  accused  of  encouraging  and  indulging  with 
lltadful  freouencyl  Not  so  the  true  church— she  comes  like  Jesoa 
Chiitt  to  call  sinners  to  repentance,  and  heal  the  contrite  of  hearts 
■he  employs  his  own  inviting,  and  attractive,  accents  of  pity  and 
ciNn|iasion  :— "  Come  to  me  all  you  that  labor  and  are  heavy  bur- 
dened, and  /will  refresh  you,  not  drive  you  to  despair,  to  acts  of  self 
destruction;  and  you  shall  find  rest  for  your  souls,"  Matthew  xi.  28. 
A  hard  heart  will  fare  badly  in  the  end,  says  the  scripture,  and  conse- 

Swntly  every  feeling  of  justice  and  humanity  revolts  at  the  idea  that 
e  Novatians  could  have  been  animated  by  the  meek  spirit  of  Jesua 
Christ,  when  they  condemned  to  eternal  exclusion  from  the  church  for 
tainglef  and  that,  frequently,  a  compulsory  fault,  as  when  an  individ- 
ual waa  Oondemned  by  brute  force  to  offer  incense  to  the  idols,  or  the 
JDoittliti,  who  revolted  against  the  authority  of  the  African  bishops, 
and  ravaged  the  countries  where  they  prevailed  with  a  lawless  soldiery. 
Is  this  the  meek  cMurch  of  him  who  came  to  preach  deliverance  to 
captives!  Must  we  palliate  these  and  a  hundred  similar  excesses,  to 
onniinale  a  church  which  would,  if  her  mild  counsels  were  obeyed,  have 
■terted  these  evils  from  mankind  1  Is  it  candid,  is  it  just,  to  blame  her 
without  cause  and  to  withhold  praise  where  it  is  due  1  The  Roman 
Catholie  church  has  never  given  the  example  of  such  cruelty.  She 
on  the  contrary  admits  all  sinners  to  repentance;  she  counts  as  belonging 
to  her  communion,  all  the  children  baptized  in  Protestant  communions 
who  die  before  they  are  capable  of  committing  mortal  sin,  or  who  living 
ill  invincible  ignorance  that  they  have  been  bred  up  in  error,  keep 
the  comiandments  of  God,  and  love  him,  as  far  as  their  knowledge  of 
Ma  divine  nature  will  permit.  All  these  belong  to  the  soul  of  the 
church ;  and  are  consequently  amon^  the  most  precious  of  her  fold. 
Even  among  the  unenlightened  Indians  if  any  there  be  that  keep  inviola- 
bly the  natural  law  and  serve  their  Creator  according  to  the  best  lights 
which  they  possess,  these  she  enrolls  among  her  children,  and  teaches 
OS  to  consider  them  as  objects  of  God's  special  mercy,  whom  he  will 
not,  aecoiding  to  St.  Thomaa  Aquinas,  fail  to  illustrate  with  the  light 
of  divine  truth.  For  this  purpose  the  resources  of  his  wisdom,  are 
like  that  wisdom,  infinite.  Thus  while  the  Catholic  church  watches 
with  the  most  scrupulous  fidelity  over  the  purity  of  faith,  in  her 
hat  the  beautiful  aaying  of  the  psalmist  been  fulfilled,  "  Merey  and 
Imth  have  met  one  another,  justice  and  peace  have  kissed."  Pa. 
lizxiv.  11. 

By  what  ingenuity  can  the  gentleman  flatter  himself  he  will  eatah- 
llsh  the  claims  of  the  discordant  and  evanescent  sects  of  these  early 
ages  to  the  title  of  Catholics.  Slayphus-like,  these  sects  which  he  is 
laboring  so  hard,  so  vainly,  to  roll  up  to  the  summit  of  that  "  moun- 
liin  placed  upon  the  top  of  mountains,"  spoken  of  by  Is.  ii.  3* 
and  which  is  the  aptest  figure  of  the  Catholic  church,  to  which  all  na- 
flow,  will  fall  upon  faui  and  crush  him.    He  can  never  prove 


ROMAN  gXTUOhlC    RKLIGIOX, 


73 


them  Catholic  in  itme^  in  place,  or  in  doctrine*.  The  Novatians  did 
not  slip  into  the  Donatists,  nor  the  Donatists  into  the  Paulicians ;  there 
was  no  common  bond  of  union,  no  identity  of  doctrine,  among  these 
heterogeneous  sects.  As  it  is  the  same  sun  which  took  its  station  in 
the  heavens  at  the  creation  that  now  shines  over  us,  so  it  is  the  same 
religion  that  was  taught  eighteen  hundred  years  ago  by  Jesus  Christ, 
that  irradiates  us  at  this  very  day  with  the  light  of  truth  ;  and  not  more 
difficult  would  it  be  to  count  all  the  vapors,  mists  and  clouds,  that 
passed  athwart  the  bright  luminary  of  day  since  he  first  gladdened  the 
universe  with  his  beams,  than  to  enumerate  the  numberless  sect^  that 
have  cast  their  shadows  on  the  light  of  Catholic  holiness,  and  purity, 
and  truth,  since  the  origin  of  Christianity.  They  have  passed,  or  are 
fast  passing  away  for  ever,  while  she  lasts  on,  and  will  last  till  the  end 
of  time.  "I  have  seen  the  wicked,"  says  the  Psalmist,  xxxvi.  35, 
**  highly  exalted,  and  lifted  up  like  the  cedars  of  Lebanon.  And  I 
passed,  and  lo!  he  was  not,  and  his  place  was  not  to  be  found."  This 
IS  a  glorious  indication  of  the  stability  of  the  Catholic  church — of  the 
truth  of  the  power  that  sustains  her.  And  as  she  signalized  her 
triumph  over  all  the  false  gods  of  Paganism,  by  establishing  the 
church  of  All  Saints,  and  of  the  God  who  made  them  saints,  on  the 
ruins  of  the  greatest  of  idolatrous  temples,  so  does  she  signalize  her 
triumph  over  all  sects  and  heresies,  falsely  professing  to  be  christian, 
by  the  ausfust  pontiff  who  speaks  to  the  eternal  city  and  the  Catholic 
world.  From  the  inspiration  of  scripture,  and  of  splendid  facts,  I  pass 
to  the  inspiration  of  poetry,  I  care  not  whose,  and  close  the  words  of 
my  argument  in  the  words  of  Byron: 

•*But  thou  of  temijles  old,  or  altars  new, 
Standest  alone — with  nothing  like  to  thee — 
Worthiest  of  God,  the  holy  and  the  true! 
Since  Zion's  desolation,  wnen  that  He 
Forsook  his  former  city,  what  could  be 
Of  earthly  structures  in  his  honor  pil'd 
Of  a  subhnier  aspect  ?    Maiesty, 
Power,  g^loiy,  strength,  and  l>eautv,  all  are  aisl'd. 
In  this  eternal  ark  of  worship  undefiPd." 

•  *  «  »  • 

My  friend  has  dwelt  eloquently  upon  riots  in  the  church  in  particn- 
lar  aeasons  of  excitement.  But  shall  a  society  forfeit  all  claims  to 
rcfard,  because,  in  seasons  of  high  excitement,  differences  of  opinion 
proceed  to  violence!  or  a  few  1^  people  come  to  blows!  It  has 
happened,  and  may  happen  among  all  oenominations,  even  the  most 
peaceful  sects,  and  every  body  of  men ;  (instances  were  here  specified.) 
A  riot  may  take  place  at  an  election  of  president,  and  blood  he  shed  ; 
but  does  this  affect  the  title  of  chief  magistrate  of  this  union  ?  Is  ho 
to  lose  his  office  because  blows  were  struck  during  the  election!  and 
if  the  pope  could  not  always  be  elected  peaceably,  by  reason  of  the 
disturbances  created  by  men,  was  the  succession  to  cease,  and  waa 
there  never  to  be  a  pope  again,  or  a  bishop,  or  any  other  pastor  in  the 
church  !  was  Christ  not  God  because  Peter,  the  servant  Malchus,  shed 
blood  for  him!  See  the  terrible  effects  of  my  friend's  bad  reasoning. 
The  deist  has  availed  himself  of  it,  and  denied  the  God  of  the  Old 
Testament,  because  exterminating  wars,  as  we  there  read,  were  waged 
at  his  command.  We  must  m&e  allowances  for  the  passions  and 
G  10 


.I'll 


|4 


■OMAM   CATHOLIC    EKLIOION. 


75 


■I 


ifeaicneBses  of  human  nature;  but  the  aim  of  religion  h  to  correct,  tn 
heal,  if  she  cannot  entirely  remove  them.  When  the  pope  was  elected, 
m  the  case  alluded  to,  he  restored  order.  As  Christ  said  to  Peter,  so 
said  he  to  the  mob  excited  by  Novatian,  "  Put  up  again  thy  sword 
Into  its  place,  for  all  that  take  the  sword  shall  perish  with  the  swerd." 
Matthew  xxvi.  52. 

The  gentleman  asked  me  to  tell  him  in  what  objectionable  sense  the 
bishop  of  Constantinople  claimed  the  title  of  Universal  Father,  h 
was  in  a  sense  never  used  before;  he  had  no  title  to  it;  he  assumed 
too  much  in  claiming  it.  Again,  it  was  he  who  pretended  that  no 
sacrament  could  be  administered  but  by  bis  authority.  The  Catholic 
church  teaches  that,  however  ilHciily  he  may  exercise  it,  no  authority 
on  earth  can  take  even  from  a  degraded  priest  the  power  of  consecrat- 
ing. Schismatical  bishops,  when  duly  ordained  themselves,  could 
ordain  bishops,  priests  and  inferior  clerflnr.  We  admit  the  baptism 
of  Methodists  and  Baptists  by  aspersionTor  immersion,  as  I  have 
already  explained ;  and  even  the  orders  of  the  English  Episcopal 
church  are  contested,  on  the  ground  of  the  very  serious  doubt  whether 
the  first  of  their  bishops  was,  himself,  consecrated  by  a  bishop,  or 
if  so,  by  a  valid  formulary. 

My  friend  was  not  at  all  accurate  in  stating  the  number  of  bishops 
present  at  some  of  the  first  councils.  There  were  more  present  at 
them,  as  I  can  easily  shew,  than  he  has  stated.  He  draws  a  parallel 
Detween  the  council  of  Nice  and  the  house  of  representatives.  I  do 
not  understand  the  force  of  his  analogy.  If  that  council  belonged  ex 
clusively  to  the  Greeks,  why  did  they  permit  a  Latin  to  preside  !  But 
it  was  to  shew  the  world  that  they  admitted  the  authority  of  Rome 
thai  Osius,  the  pope's  legate,  presided — and  without  his  signature, 
and  the  pope's  approbation,  their  acts  would  have  had  no  force  as  rules 
of  Catholic  faith.  What  analogy  is  there  between  Henry  Clay  and 
Osius  I  Did  they  stand  in  the  same  relation  to  their  respective  assem- 
blies? Did  they  ever  dream  that  they  would  be  placed  in  juxta  posi- 
tion I  If  the  speaker  of  the  house,  or  the  president  of  the  senate,  were 
to  object  to  the  passing  of  a  law,  would  his  veto  avail  anything  1 
would  not  the  majority  rule! 

My  friend  said,  first,  that  CaihoKc  was  a  new  term;  and  next,  when 
lie  found  it  impossible  to  prove  that,  insisted  it  was  not  used  to  designate 
the  chureh,  by  inspired  writers.  I  have  abundantly  disproved  both 
of  these  assertions.  The  apostles  were  inspired  writers,  and  it  dates 
from  their  time ;  and  they  alone,  according  to  the  rule  of  St.  Augustin, 
had  the  right  to  institute  it.  Besides,  what  are  all  the  glorious  pro- 
phesies of  the  universal  diffusion  of  the  church  by  Isaiah,  &c.  Au;.  but 
the  evidence  that  it  should  be  what  its  name  imports!  In  fact,  it  was 
Catholic  before  all  the  New  Testament  was  completed.  And  the 
apostles,  aware  of  the  doubts  that  error  would  originate  on  the  autho- 
rity of  the  church,  gave  a  sure  and  unerring  guide  to  every  sincere  be- 
liever, teaching  him  to  say,  next  after  the  profession  of  his  belief  in  God 
himself — not,  I  believe  in  the  bible— it  is  not  once  mentioned — not  ic 
any  sect — there  were  none  heard  of  at  that  time— but  "I  believe  ia  tbt 
holy  Catholic  church."— [Time  expired.] 


Mft«  Campbell  riiet— 


Tkrm  o'clock^  P.  J£ 


I  may  have  mistaken  In  ascribing  to  the  bishop  of  Rome  what  was 
done  by  the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  in  reference  to  the  personal 
consecration  of  the  successor  of  Mauritius ;  but  this  does  not  affect 
the  justice  of  my  remark,  or  invalidate  my  reasoning :  and  I  think 
my  worthy  friend  apprehends  this,  inasmuch  as  the  consecration  was 
approved  and  sustamed  by  Gregory.  I  read  those  documents  at  the 
same  time,  and  may  have  confounded  them,  but  we  shall  hear  them 
again  and  see  how  much  is  either  gained  or  lost  by  the  admission. 

"As  a  subject  and  a  christian,  it  was  the  duty  of  Greg;ory  to  acquiesce  in  the 
established  government,  but  the  joyful  applause  with  which  he  salutes  the  fur- 
tune  of  the  assassin,  has  sullied  with  indelible  disgrace  the  character  of  the 
taint.  The  successor  of  the  apostles  might  have  inculcated  with  decent  firm- 
nest  the  guilt  of  blood,  and  the  necessity  of  repentance  :  he  is  content  to  cele* 
brate  the  deliverance  of  the  people  and  the  fall  of  the  oppressor;  to  rejoice  that 
the  piety  and  benignity  of  Pnocas  have  been  raised  by  providence  to  the  impe- 
rial throne;  to  pray  that  his  hands  may  be  strengthened  against  all  his  enemies; 
and  to  express  a  wish,  perhajM  a  prophecy,  that,  after  a  long  and  triomphant 
reilCD,  he  may  be  transferred  from  a  temporal  to  an  everlasting  kingdom."*— 
Crutbon  Hiti.  Dec.  and  Fall  Rom,  Emp.  vol.  viii.  p,  211. 

Now  this,  if  I  mistake  not,  amounts  in  substance  to  my  affirmation. 
Gregory  approved  the  usurpation,  and  sanctioned  the  induction  into 
office  of  a  man  who  had  wrested  the  throne  from  the  legitimate  master, 
and  who  was  both  a  murderer  and  a  usurper. 

I  could  wish  that  my  opponent  would  select  some  of  the  great  points 
of  my  argument  in  his  replies,  and  form  an  issue  with  me.  Were  this 
piece  of  history  blotted  out  of  existence,  what  loss  to  the  main  argu- 
ment! These  are  merely  incidental  and  minor  matters-^illustrations 
rather  than  proofs,  and  leave  the  great  facts  as  they  were.  I  must, 
however,  briefly  glance  at  some  other  little  things  before  I  resume  ny 
argument. 

The  gentleman's  next  remark  was,  **  that  Joshua  was  the  successor 
of  Moses.**  True  it  is,  that  every  man  is  in  one  sense  successor  to 
some  one  who  preceded  him.  But  Moses  was,  for  a  time,  captain, 
prophet,  priest,  and  king  of  Jeshurun.  Joshua,  however,  merely  com- 
manded the  people,  and  divided  the  land  of  Canaan  among  them.  This 
cid  not  Moses:  Moses  accomplished  all  that  he  was  appointed  to  do. 
He  needed  no  successor  in  the  peculiar  work  assigned  him.  They 
were  both  extraordinary  offices.  .  Moses  was  a  law-giver,  and  Joshua 
a  savior.  The  law  was  given  to  the  people  by  Moses :  Joshua  gave 
them  an  inheritance.  Neither  of  them,  in  the  nature  of  things,  could 
have  a  successor  in  the  same  office,  for  its  duties  were  all  discharged. 

I  was  pleased  to  hear  the  gentleman  admit  all  that  I  said  concerning 
the  Novatians.  They  had  one  fault  which  we  both  allow— they  were 
too  severe  in  one  branch  of  discipline— they  could  never  receive  thos« 
who  had  grievously  fallen— no  repentance  would  obtain  re-admission 
if  the  penitent  had  very  flagrantly  sinned.    The  occasion  was  this: 

*  Gregor.  1.  x\.  epist.  38,  indict,  vi.  Benignitatem  vestrae  pietatis  ad  impe* 
riale  fastigium  pervenisse  ^udemus.  Lsetentur  coeli  et  exultet  terra,  et  da 
#estrts  benignis  actibus  universse  reipublicte  populus  nunc  usque  vehenienter 
affltctus  hilarescat,  &c.  This  base  flattery,  the  topic  of  Protestant  invective,  ig 
justly  censured  by  the  philosopher  Bayle,  (Dictionnaire  Critique,  Gregoire  1. 
riot.  H.  tom.  ii.  p.  597,  598.)  Cardinal  Barrooiut  justifies  the  pope  at  the  ex- 
peme  cf  the  fklleo  emperor. 


» 


gMM  DBBAXK    lllf    TUS 

In  llw  interim  of  ilie  Pwram  persecutions,  many  new  conTerts  were 
•iifl«d  to  tlie  chmcliea.  Br  and  by,  when  the  storm  of  persecution 
■UNO,  they  withdrew  and  fell  away:  but  when  a  calm  ensued,  they 
•Oifliltobe  restoied  to  the  church.  The  Novatians  opposed  their 
lestontidn;  the  other  party  contended  for  it.  The  Puritans  got  vexed 
with  the  frequent  indulgences  and  backslidings  of  such  professors ; 
tiid  tbie  occasioned  that  extreme  on  their  part,  which  drew  down  upon 
tlmii  wmm  anathemas  from  the  other  party.  They  had  other  ohjec- 
tioM  iiimes  this  against  the  opposing  party ;  but  this  was  sufficient 
m  a  'iiTision. 

I  was  sorry  to  hear  the  gentleman  excusing  the  church  for  embrac- 
ing in  its  bosom  men  of  every  sort  of  wickedness.  He  spoke  with 
£eat  feeling  and  eloquence  upon  the  subject  of  calling  ourselves  holy, 
s.  We  admit  that  there  Is  no  man  free  from  all  pollution,  whose 
licart  it  always  and  only  pure.  Bat  what  has  this  to  do  with  the 
0|i«iilf  wicked  and  profane — reprobates  of  the  deepest  dye!  Ought 
dm  efiiTBh  to  open  her  doors  as  wide  as  the  human  race,  apd  admit 
•very  human  being  without  discrimination  I  Is  there  no  medium  I 
Me  pooled  the  parable  of  the  tares  and  wheat.  It  is  true,  the  Savior 
commanded  to  let  the  tares  and  wheat  grow  together  till  Ltrvest :  but 
Ilia  gentleman  asfiijii€il  that  it  was  spoken  of  the  ekureh'  I  admit  the 
dnetrine^  as  applied  to  the  world,  *•  The  field  h  ths  wc^ldy^  not  the 
ehoreh,  said  the  Savior.  Does  this  excuse  us  for  toloi&tjti^  reprobates 
•fi  the  homm  tf  the  church?  "You  are  not  of  lliis  ^f>i\  f,"  says  the 
Savior  to  his  disciples — *'■  My  kingdom  is  not  of  thk  iroild,"  **  Come 
out  from  among  them,  and  separate  yourselves,  and  !  vill  receive  you, 

""ather.    What  concord  hu  Chii.l  with  Belial,  or 


the  Almighty  Father, 
lie' that  believeth  with  an  infidel  V* 

As  to  the*<continuaiion  of  the  Novatians  till  the  Donatists,  and  the 
Bonatists  tiU  the  Paulicians,"  &c.  my  friciid  emphasizes  the  word  till, 
as  if  those  witnesses  for  Christ  had  died  away  when  some  new  sect 
aieee.  The  fact  is,  that  when  some  great  leader  arose,  his  name  was 
iili|l08ed  upon  all  that  associated  with  kim ;  and  different  leaders,  in 
various  parts  of  the  world,  moved  great  masses  of  professors,  who 
wen  eseenlially  the  same  people;  aira  when  they  became  acquainted 
with  eaffh  other,  they  coalesced  under  one  great  profession,  variously 
■idnamed  by  the  opposite  party.  So  are  the  Lutherans,  Calvinists, 
Wealeyans,  Cameronians,  ue.  of  our  own  time. 

Sony  was  I  to  hear  my  libera]  antagonist  compare  the  Protestant 
■■•tn  to  the  psalmist's  description  of  a  prosperous  wicked  man — "I 
■aw,''  says  he,  "the  wicked  great  in  power,  spread  himself  like  a 
graenbay  tree:  he  passed  away;  yea,  he  was  not.  I  sought  him,  and 
be  could  not  be  found.**  I  do  not  know  how  his  Episcopalian  friends 
will  thank  him  for  this  compliment.  I  have  no  doubt  in  this  he  was 
pneam,  for  the  Romanists  often  bewailed  the  long  life  of  Elizabeth, 
heeaiiae^  under  her  reij^n,  a  new  race  of  Protestants  was  bom  and  edu- 
cated, and  alienated  from  the  Roman  hierarchy,  who  were  proof  a^inst 
all  the  machinations  of  Rome.  They  hoped  that  the  Protestant  Epis- 
eopalians  would,  like  the  green  bay  tree  of  David,  (emblem  of  the 
prosperous  wicked,)  have  withered  away,  and  been  reabsorbed  by  the 
mother  church ;  but  for  once  the  application  failed,  and  the  wicked 
Frolialants  have  for  three  eentories  grown  and  increased.  In  de- 
■piia  of  all  the  policy  and  effort  of  Home,  and  arc  now  in  expectation 


BOMAN   CATHOLIC    BELIGION. 


77 


of  seeing  tfie  same  S7th  psalm  rerified  in  the  fates  of  R^man  Catho- 
licism. 

Every  sect  and  individual,  as  I  said  before,  is  passive  in  re- 
ceiving a  name.  Sectarian  names  are  generally  given  in  the  way  of 
reproach ;  thus  the  disciples  were  first  called  christians  at  Antioch, 
most  probably  in  derision ;  yet  it  was  a  very  proper  name.  Call  us 
what  you  please,  however,  it  does  not  change  nature  or  race.  The 
disciples  of  Christ  are  the  same  race,  call  them  Christians,  Nazarenes, 
Galileans,  Novatians,  Donatists,  Paulicians,  Waldonses,  Albigenses, 
Protestants,  or  what  you  please.  A  variety  of  designation  affects  not 
the  fact  which  we  allege;  we  can  find  an  unbroken  series  of  Protes- 
tants— a  regular  succession  of  those  who  protested  against  the  corrup- 
tions of  the  Roman  church,  and  endeavored  to  hold  fast  the  faith  onco 
delivered  to  the  saints,  from  the  first  schism  in  the  year  250,  A.  D.  to 
the  present  day  ;  and  you  may  apply  to  them  what  description  or  de 
■ignation  you  please. 

The  gentleman  spoke  of  these  sects  as  waves  passing  by  while  the 
tnie  church  remained  like  a  wall,  immoveable  and  nnchangeable. 
History  refuses  him  her  suffrage  in  this  assumption:  for  it  deposes 
that  she  has  changed,  in  whole,  or  in  part,  her  tenets  and  her  disci- 
pline, no  less  than  eighteen  times  in  all — that  is,  once,  at  least  for 
every  general  council.  She  is  the  mutable  immutable  church,  con- 
tending for  uniformity  in  faith  and  variety  of  discipline. 

My  opponent  has  quoted  the  apostles'  creed.  Du  Pin,  and  a  learn- 
ed host  prove  that  the  apostles  never  wrote  it  The  doctrine  contained 
in  it,  I  admit  is  apostolic.  And  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  like  all 
old  creeds,  it  states /ac/«  ,•  whereas  modern  creeds  are  human  exposi- 
tions of  doctrines.  For  my  own  part,  I  can  adopt  every  article  of  that 
creed,  ear  arvmo ;  except,  perhaps,  I  would  change  one  expression,  and 
say  that  *  I  believe  in  a  Catholic  church.'  I  believe  that  there  does 
exist  such  a  thing  as  a  truly  Catholic  church  of  Christ.  But  as  for 
human  creeds,  I  make  no  such  platforms  a  bond  of  union  among 
christians.  We,  like  the  Romanists,  differ  about  church  discipline 
among  ourselves :  but  all  the  Protestant  world  believes  this  *  apostles' 
creed,'  as  it  is  called ;  and  are  as  uniform  in  this  Mth  asthe  **  mother 
church"  herself. 

I  was  eony  to  hear  the  election  of  the  pope,  the  pretended  ricar  of 
Christ,  as  respects  riots,  and  blows,  and  carnage,  compared  to  that  of 
the  president  of  the  United  States,  and  to  have  the  excesses  com- 
plained of  in  Rome,  excused  on  the  ground,  that  sometimes  we  have 
mobs,  and  perhaps  a  fight  on  a  presidential  election.  Is  the  presiden- 
tial chair  of  such  dignity  and  sanctity  as  that  of  the  vicar  of  Christ!  ! 
And  is  a  riot  or  murder  no  more  incongruous  in  the  one  case  than  in 
the  other!  We  opine,  that  he  who  holds  that  exalted  station  should 
come  into  it  without  blood.  And  yet  in  all  these  political  elections, 
since  the  Protestant  reformation,  there  is  nothing  to  equal  half  the  up- 
roar, and  tumult,  and  murder,  that  happened  in  filling  the  chair  of  St. 
Peter,  at  the  conflict  between  Damasus  and  Ursinus,  not  to  mention  a 
second.  Can  it  be  compared  to  the  election  of  the  president  so  as  to 
transfer  to  the  one  the  language  which  is  pertinent  to  the  other!  As, 
for  example,  "  Take  heed  to  the  flock  over  which  the  Holy  Spirit  haa 
placed  you!" 

The  gentleman  is  glad  that  his  church  is  » liberal  as  to  authorim 
e  3 


« 


78 


.miJlTS  ON  TBS 


mwif  ma  of  iMfliMi.  eteii  tli.t  performea  by  liefttkt,  pfOTiM  <»1| 
the  proper  name  be  pronounced !  This  is  certainly  a  modem  excess 
of  liberality.  If  1  am  riRhily  informed,  his  predecesnor,  in  this  veiy 
charge,  was  not  so  liberal  as  he — in  one  case,  at  least,  which  occurred 
at  Portsmouth  in  this  state.  There  were  two  members  of  the  Episco- 
ptl  church,  one  of  the  parlies  the  son  of  an  Episcopalian  minister,  de- 
■irous  of  entering  into  matrimony.  Bishop  tenwick  desired  to  know 
©f  what  party  the)  were,  and  on  learning  that  they  were  Episcopalians, 
Wifused  to  marry  them,  unless  previously  baptized  by  himself.  There 
may  be  many  other  instances  of  the  same  sort,  certainly,  in  former 
iiiM8  lliaM  were  many,  and  so  far  as  they  proye  that  the  church  is  not 
iinnutable,  are  hopeful  indications  of  the  possibility  of  reform.  But 
Ihia  it  not  the  question  before  us.  We  are  not  discussing  baptism,  ot 
tlM  eacharist,  or  any  of  the  "  seven  sacraments,'*  or  any  ordinance  of 
tla  church.  Will  the  jrontleman  inform  us  whether  his  church  regards 
ilM  administration  of  the  eucharist,  or  any  other  of  her  seven  sacra- 
ments Talid,  unless  at  the  hand  of  those  whom  she  authoriaea  to  min- 
i»ister  them.  Let  him  not  wave  the  Question  by  a  reference  to  a  prao- 
tice  which  he  knows  can  be  explained  on  other  principles* 

1  shall  not  now  stop  to  dispute  about  Sylvester  and  the  council  ot 
Nioe:  hut  shall  resume  my  general  argument  where  I  left  off. 

All  agree  that  if  primacy  or  supremacy  reside  in  the  chprch  at  all, 
ft  must  reside  in  some  permru  If  Jesus  Christ  intended  to  make  Petei 
the  prince  of  apostles,  the  vicar  of  Christ;  the  title  will  prove  it  clear 
ly.  If  this  headship,  on  the  other  hand,  was  not  given  to  Peter;  none 
ran  derive  it  from  him  by  succession.  Was  Peter  invested  with  this 
authority  1  If  not,  none  can  pretend  to  it  as  his  successora.  The 
whole  i|uestion  rests  on  this.  My  learned  opponent  cannot  show  thai 
Peler  ever  had  such  an  office.  He  affirms,  indeed,  that  Peter  was  su« 
perior  to  the  rest  of  the  apostles :  but  does  he  show  in  what  respect ! 
How  many  kinds  of  superiority  might  (here  have  been  in  his  case  I  1 
will  answer  for  him  and  say  that  there  are,  at  least^/otir.  1st.  of  age, 
Snd.  of  talents,  3d.  of  character,  and  4th.  of  office.  Thuseare  clearly 
marked  in  holy  writ,  and  fixed  in  society.  Admit  then  that  Peter  is  « 
head  of  the  list ;  can  he  decide  which  of  these  four  has  pltfced  him 
flat.  The  bishop  tmertM  that  he  was  first  in  tffiee.  Bat  bow  can  he 
take  this  for  granted,  when  theie  are  three  other  ways  in  which  Pete? 
■il^t  be  at  the  head  I  Is  this  the  reasoning  that  logic  or  Catholicism 
sanctions  <ir  requires ! 

I  would  request  the  gentleman  to  tell  us,  how  he  knows  which  of 
tliese  four  sorts  of  superiority  to  ascribe  to  Peter !  He  assumes  one, 
and  is  bold  in  asserting  the  Cfatholic  doctrine  of  a  supreme  head  of  the 
chuich  on  this  assumption.  Peter  may  have  been  the  oldest,  or  the 
irat  called  of  all  the  apostles :  or  his  character  or  talents  may  haT« 

S'mm  him  a  decided  superiority ;  why  then  assume  one,  to  the  exclu- 
on  of  the  othero.  The  greatest  empires  have  been  built  on  the  most 
bold  aifsumptions.  But  never  was  there  a  more  baseless  monarchy  in 
the  annals  of  time  than  that  of  papal  Rome.  I  wish  mv  opponent 
would  for  once  assume,  or  take  up  some  one  of  these  grand  points,  on 
which  his  church  rests,  and  not  waste  his  time  in  fighting  about  sha- 
dows or  peccadillos.  Let  him  come  at  once  to  the  great  principles  of 
lbs  debate.  I  challenge  him  to  show  cause,  why  he  assumes  for  Petei 
y  of  offiG%  laiher  than  of  age,  of  talent,  or  of  character; 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 

anyone  of  which  is  much  more  feasible  and  probable  than  that  whicb 
he  has  begged.— [Time  expired.] 

ffalf  pad  3  o^dock^  P.  3f. 

Bishop  Purcell  rises— 

I  was  far  from  charging  Mr.  C.  with  a  wilful  dereliction  of  the  tnith 
when  he  stated,  what  he  now  confesses  to  be  untrue,  that  Gregory 
crowned  Phocas.     The  imputed  motive  was  very  base,  but  he  now 
sees  that  it  was  not  the  pope's.     I  attribute  this  exlraordmary  mis- 
take,  on  the  part  of  my  friend,  to  the  fact  of  his  having  been  too  apt 
to  believe  that  every  thing  written  against  Catholics  must  be  true,  and 
to  his  memory's  not  having  been  lately  refreshed  in  his  early  readings. 
But  it  is   due    to  the  public  that  he  should  apologize  for  having, 
through  want  of  care  on  a  matter  of  so  much  importance,  fallen  into 
BO  very  serious  a  mistake  in  what  was  calculated  so  deeply  to  injure 
the  truth.     He  should  first  have  inquired  whether  all  he  said  was 
true.    I  repeat,  then,  that  Gregory  did  not  crown  Phocas  at  all,  much 
less  for  the  express  purpose  of  eliciting  from  the  gratitude  of  the  sover- 
eign an  acknowledgment  of  his  **  papal  supremacy"  for  this  recognition 
was  as  old  as  Christianity.    Order  was  restored  in  Constantinople,    lie 
then  sent  him  words  of  compliment  on  his  accession.  It  is  contrary  to 
the  rules  of  sound  argument  to  presume  that  Gregory  approved  ot  the 
circumstances  which  led  to  the  change  of  dynasty.    Napoleon  grasped 
the  Iron  crown  of  Italy,  from  the  altar  and  put  it  on  his  brow  tor  he 
acknowledged  no  Donor  thereof  but  his  sword.     So  would  Phocas, 
very  probably  have   done  with  the   crown  of  C,  whatever    bre- 
cory  mitrht  have  thought   of  the  act.     Moreover,  Phocas  did  not 
burl  Mauritius  from  the  throne.  Mauritius  abdicated,  and  the  people, 
not  the  bishop  of  C.  P.  made  Phocas  king,  in  the  place  of  Mauritius, 
a  miser,  and  a  tyrant;  and  Gregory  rejoiced,  not  at  the  disturbances  but 
at  the  restoration  of  order.     My  friend  now  treats  these  matters  as 
liffht,  and  incidental.    It  was  he  himself  who  made  then  principals, 
by  the  manner  in  which  he  introduced  them.  He  was  arguing  a  knotty 
point,  the  manner  in  which  Rome  came  to  "  assume"  her  high  pre- 
rocrative  over  the  church.    The  plain,  scriptural  truth,  that  she  came 
tolt  by  divine  appointment  was  before  his  eyes,  but  he  would  not  see 
it.  Is  It  to  be  wondered  at  that  he  saw  in  history  what  was  not  there ! 
I  will  say  no  more  on  the  subject  of  Joshua.  Eusebius  confirms,  p.  46, 
what  I  have  said.   The  object  of  the  ministry  of  the  old  or  of  the  new 
law,  of  the  coming  of  Christ,  of  the  shedding  of  his  blood,  and  all  the  in- 
stitutions of  his  religion,  was  not  the  setting  up  of  a  tabernacle  m  the  wil- 
derness, or  the  crossing  of  the  Jordan,  or  the  surveying  of  a  piece  of 
land  and  dividing  it  among  a  few  tribes,  but  the  salvation  of   man- 
kind, without  any  exception,  or  distinction  of  age,  or  clime;   and 
this  great  work  of  regeneration  and  redemption  is  just  as  important 
now,  and  will  continue  so  while  there  are  immortal  souls  to  be  en- 
liahtened  and  saved,  as  it  was  in  the  days  of  the  apostles.     'Pheir 
oftce  must  remain,  and  their  successors  are  charged  with  it.     The 
bishops  and  their  assistant  brethren  watch  over  the  safety  of  the  fold, 
and  the  sovereign  pontiff  sees  that  they  and  their  flocks  persevere  in 
unity.     He  watches  over  all.  .        -r»    t  • 

Mr.  C.  persists  in  saying  that  the  Novatians,  Donatists,  Paulicians 
&c.  &c.  agreed  in  doctrine,  and  may  be  considered  as  the  Catholic 


% 


!■ 


*\ 


80 


'DBBATB   Om    TlIS 


BO.VATr    CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


81 


ehurch.  I  have  already  refuted  this  theory,  hut  here  is  Protestant  tea 
timony  again  to  destroy  it,  and  I  hope  wo  shall  not  waste  any  more 
time  on  it,  for  it  is  too  ahsurd.  "  No  heretic,"  says  Waddmgton, 
ji.  154,  "  was  as  likely  as  the  Donatist  to  lay  claim  to  the  name  Ca- 
tliolic ;  yet  even  a  Dunatist,  while  he  maintained  that  the  true  spirit 
and  purity  were  alone  perpetuated  in  his  own  communion,  would  scarce- 
ly hare  affirmed  that  that  was  honajide  the  universal  church,  which 
did  not  atknd  bevmtd  the  th&res  of  jfrica,  and  which  Imd  not  the  mtk^ 
jority  etwi  ihttt*  Speaking  of  the  sects  in  Dauphine  and  other  errorists 
condemned  at  Arras  in  1&5,  the  same  author  says,  (p.  554)  "  It  is 
proper  to  mention  what  these  opinions  really  w^cre,  which  were  con 
demned  at  Arras,  lest  it  should  be  supposed  that  iiuiy  were  at  variance 
only  with  the  Roman  Catliolic  church,  and  siri(5tly  in  accordance  with 
ipiwtolic  truth."  "It  was  asserted  that  the  sacrament  of  baptism 
was  useless  and  of  no  eflcacy  to  salvation,  (what  does  Mr.  C.  think 
of  this  1)  that  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  supper  was  equally  unne- 
cessary.— It  appears  that  the  objectin'^a  of  the  heretics  on. this  point 
went  beyond  the  mere  denial  of  tlie  change  of  substance— that  the 
sacred  orders  of  the  ministry  were  not  of  divine  institution^-that 
penimee  m'as  altogether  iiiefHcacious— that  marriage  in  general  was 
contrary  to  the  evangelical  and  apostolical  laws — that  saint-worship  is 
to  beconined  to  the  apostles  and  martyrs,  &c.  &c.  so  mixed  and  various 
is  the  substance  of  those  opinions  to  which  learned  writers  on  this 
subject  appeal  wiUi  so  much  satisfaction."  A^rain, «« the;  were  all  tainU 
ed  more  or  less  deeply  by  the  poison  of  Manichaesism :  and  since  it  is 
urn  object  to  establish  a  connexion,  with  the  primitive  church,  we  shall 
scafcely  attain  it  tlirough  tliose  whose  fundamental  principle  was  nn 
cijuivocally  rejected  by  that  church,  as  irraUonal  and  impious."  655. 
Mosheim  says,  1st  vol.  p.  328,  **  Among  the  sects  that  troubled 
the  Latin  church,  this  century,  (the  12th)  the  principal  place  is  due  to 
the  Cathari,  or  Catharists,  whom  we  have  had  already  occasion  to 
mention.  'Phis  numerous  faction,  leaving  their  first  residence,  which 
was  in  Bulgaria,  spread  themselves  throughout  almost  all  the  European 
provinces,  where  they  occasioned  much  tumult  and  disorder.  Their 
reltj^ion  resembled  the  doctrine  of  the  Manicheans  and  Gnostics,  on 
which  account  they  commonly  received  the  denomination  of  the  former, 
though  they  differed  in  many  respects  from  the  genuine  primitive 
MaMcheans.  They  all  indeed,  agreed  in  the  following  points  of  doc- 
trine, via.  that  matter  was  the  source  of  all  evil ;  that  the  creator  of 
this  world  was  a  being  distinct  from  the  supreme  deity  ;  that  Christ 
was  neither  clothed  with  a  real  body,  nor  could  be  properly  said  to 
have  been  born,  or  to  have  seen  death ;  that  human  bodies  were  the 
•radiction  of  the  evil  principle,  and  were  extinguished  without  the 
rospect  of  a  new  life.  They  treated  with  the  utmost  contempt  all 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  but  expressed  a  high  degree  of  ven- 
eration for  the  New."  Speaking  of  the  Waldenses,  p.  332,  Mosheim 
says,  ••  They  committed  the  government  of  the  church  to  bishops, 
presbyters  and  deacons,  but  they  deemed  it  absolutely  necessary  that 
all  theae  orders  should  resemble  exactly  the  apostles  of  the  divine 
Savior,  and  be  like  them  illiterate^  &c.  &c.  The  laity  were  divided 
Into  two  cla<«se9,  one  of  w^hieh  contained  the  perfect  and  the  other  the 
impeffed  christians.*'  Of  another  sect,  the  Pasaginians,  Mosheim 
•ayis,  p.  333,  "  They  circumcised  their  followers,  and  held  that  the  law 
of  Moses,  in  every  thing  but  sacrifice,  was  obligatory  upon  Chris- 


^bna.**    "What  the  same  Protestant  historian  savs  of  the  brethien  of 
the  free  spirit  is  too  horrid.    It  is  the  foulest  of  the  mr.ny  foul  pages 
he  has  stained  with  the  history  of  sects.    *•  Tlicy  maintained  that  the 
believer  could  not  sin,  let  his  conduct  be  ever  so  horrible  and  atro- 
cious."   The  celebrated  Ziska,  not  a  Roman  Catholic  inquisitor,  but 
the  austere  general  of  the  Hussites,  another  sect  of  Protestants,  fall- 
ing upon  this  raiserible  sect  in  1421,  "  put  some  to  the  sword  and 
condemned  the  rest  to  the  flames."     Mosheim,  428.  "  A  sect  of  fana- 
tics called  Caputiati^  infested  Moravia  and  Burgundy,  the  diocese  of 
A«3xerre,  and  several  other  parts  of  France,  in  all  which  places  they 
excited  much  disturbance  among  the  people.     They  declared  pubUcly 
that  their  purpose  w^as,  to  level  all  distinctions,  to  abrogate  magistra- 
cy, to  remove  all  subordination  among  mankind,  and  to  restore  that 
primitive  liberty,  that  natural  equality,  which  were  the  inestimable 
privileges  of  the  first  mortals."   Mosheim,  p.  333.  Luther  repeatedly 
declared  that  he  stood  alone,  that  all  antiquity  was  against  him.  Here 
are  startling  facts  and  no  less  startling  admissions  by  sound  Protes- 
tants. Will  my  friend  insult  this  enlightened  assembly  by  making  up  a 
monster-church,  a  very  chimera,  of  all  these  sects,  and  give  modern 
Protestants  all  the  honors  present  and  prospective  of  being  the  tail  of 
the  beast  ?    I  would  counsel  him  not  to  dream  of  doing  so,  and  them 
to  look  out  for^nore  reputable  religious  ancestors. 

But  the  Roman  Catholic  church  has  changed  at  least  in  discipline. 
Grant  it.  And  what  of  that  T  Is  it  not  the  very  nature  of  discipline  that 
it  must  be  modified  by  times,  places,  peculiarities  of  nations  and  other 
circumstances,  in  order  to  be  adapted  to  the  wants  of  man  in  all  the 
varieties  of  his  being  ?  Truth  is  unsusceptible  of  change.  Like  God 
it  is  always  the  same.  But  the  form  of  the  dress  of  the  clergy,  the  color 
of  the  wine  to  be  used  at  mass,  days  of  fasting  and  abstinence,  and 
of  public  meetings  for  prayer  and  certain  unessential  rites  in  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  sacraments,  may  be  changed.  The  constitution  of 
the  church  should  possess  this  element  of  good  government.  She  has 
the  power  to  make  these  changes,  and  she  has  made  them  as  the  wants 
of  her  children  seemed  to  require.  But  the  doctrine  is  invariable. 
Heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  away,  but,  of  it,  not  an  iota  shall  change. 

As  to  the  deaths  occasioned  in  the  election  of  a  pope,  I  ask  again, 
what  has  that  to  do  with  the  constitutionality  of  the  office  ?  The  pope 
did  not  slay  those  people.  According  to  the  gentleman's  theory,  the 
president  of  this  union  would  have  to  answer  for  the  blood,  if  any, 
spilled  at  his  election.  I  am  astonished  that  such  arguments  should 
be  repeated.  I  can  say  with  certainty  of  my  venerable  predecessor 
mat  he  would  not  have  pursued  the  course,  he  did,  if  the  story  be 
true,  if  he  had  had  reason  to  believe  the  individuals  had  never  been 
baptized — and  if  any  two  or  more  young  people  will  come  to  me,  who 
have  been  rightly  baptized  in  Protestant  communions,  I  warrant  them. 
If  there  be  no  other  obstacles,  they  shall  be  quickly  bound  together  in 
the  indissoluble  bonds  of  matrimony. 

I  am  perfectly  willing  to  revert  to  the  point  of  the  supremacy  of  St 
Peter  and  the  continuance  of  his  hij^h  authority  in  his  successors,  for  it 
is  a  cardinal  doctrine.  It  solves  a  thousand  lesser  points  of  difficulty 
and  I  am  happy  to  argue  it  again  from  tHe  New  Testament,  frunj 
church  history,  from  reason.  I  have  already  quoted  scripture  for  th.» 
dogma  of  the  supremacy  of  Peter—-*  upon  this  rock  will  I  bviili  my 
church."    My  friend  does  not  like  to  approach  that  rock, — lie  take# 

6 


I 


I 


t 


I 


'mA.n  0!f'  THE 

ctni  to  keep  sliy  of  it,  I  also  'quoted  "  feed  my  liiinbs« — feed  my 
■lieep'*— •«To  thee  I  will  dve  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"— 

•*  Blessed  srt  thou,  SimoDr— and  "  when  thou  art  anointed  confirm  thy 
liretlifen/'  &c.  All  these  texts,  and  more,  did  I  quote,  and  the  gentle- 
Bsn  has  had  my  authority  before  him.    I  shall  now  strengthen  my 

fitilt«tion  from  the  fathers,  adducing  overwhelming  facts  to  mov%  that 
'iter  was  bishop  of  Rome  and  that  the  bishops  of  that  see  have  eveb 
been  regarded  in  the  Catholic  church  as  his  successors.  Many  of  my 
liearers  may  suppose  that  this  matter  is  buried  in  the  night  of  time- 
that  history  is  either  silent,  or  not  sufficiently  clear  upon  it.  But 
when  they  Mar  the  splendid  testimonies  I  am  going  to  adduce,  they 
will  change  their  minds  on  this  subject,  and  confess  that,  from  time 
ImnMiiorial,  in  the  very  earliest  a^es,  the  church  was  precisely  the 
aame,  in  its  faith,  its  sacraments,  its  hierarchy,  its  clergy,  &c.  &c. 
that  ike  CaiMk  church  is  at  the  present  day.  (Here  bishop  Purcell 
held  up  the  map  of  the  succession  of  popes  from  the  first,  Peter  him- 
self, down  to  the  present  pontiff,  Gregory  XVI. ;  the  names  of  all  the 
moat  eminent  men  in  the  church ;  the  date  of  the  establishment  of  the 
foapel  In  the  various  countries  of  the  world,  the  origin  and  authors  of 
the  various  heresies  and  schisms,  their  condemnation  by  general  coun- 
cils, or  synods,  &c.  &c.)  let  any  other  exhibit  such  an  array ! 

Christ  Jesus  said  to  his  disciples  "  go,  teach  all  nations.'*  They 
went!  they  preached  everywhere,  and  the  world  believed !  before 
their  death  they  ordained  others  whose  names  are  here  faithfully  re- 
corded •  Here  IS  the  ecclesiastical  history  of  Eusebius,  and  according 
to  the  pun  upon  his  name  (you  see  by  us)  you  will  see  by  him  what 
a  flood  of  light  irradiates  this  subject.  Eusebius  wrote  in  the  4th 
century,  and  to  remove  all  suspicion  I  bring  before  you  the  translation 
oChia  hiatoijr  by  a  Protestant  minister,  C.  r.  Cruse,  A.  M.  Assistant 
Pliofeiaor  or  the  university  of  Pennsylvania,  2d.  edition,  revised  and 
wiifBcted  by  the  author*  [The  reading  was  interrupted  by  the  half 
ionr't  expiring.*] 

Ibur  o^ehekf  P.  J£ 
Mm.  Camfscix  rites—' 


li  tht  oflginal  Greek  of  Irensus  extant !  [The  bishop  intimates, 
•  JiS».T  Of  what  authority,  then,  is  the  version  from  which  he  r«ads  ! 
I  have  never  read  in  Ireneus  nor  seen  quoted  from  him  a  warrant  for 
the  aaamiiiCion  that  Peter  was  ever  bishop  of  Rome  1  But  of  this 
tgaiu-^' 

Alter  raising  such  a  dust  as  the  gentleman  has  about  Phocas  and 
Gregory,  it  has  become  necessary  for  me  to  re-state  my  argument. 

CfiegoiT  the  great  wrote  to  Mauritius,  requesting  him  to  induce 
John,  bishop  of  Constantinople,  to  give  up  his  claim  to  the  title  of 
universal  father.  Mauritius  would  not  do  It.  Gregory  the  great,  is 
■opposed  by  all  antiquity  to  have  harbored  a  grudge,  or  bad  feeling 
towards  Mauritius,  because  of  this ;  and  therefore  his  exultation  at 
hit  death,  lid  his  easy  recognition  of  the  pretensions  of  his  murderer, 
which  acqilescence,  on  his  part,  secured  the  compliance  of  Phocas 
with  the  wishes  of  Gregory,  and  secured  to  his  successors  the  title  of 
to  versal  patriarch,  or  pope— 

f  Bishop  Purcell  hero  observed,  that  Phocas  was  not  the  murderer 

m  Mauritius.] 

^.  — 11^—^—. 

*  Tli«  ei  tract  relVrred  to  will  be  found  io  a  rabfequent  speech. 


moMJiif  eAiiiouc  lELiGioir. 

Very  well,  I  hxre  the  authority  of  Gibbon  for  my  assertion— not 
Ibr  saying  that  he  kUled  him  by  his  own  hands :  but  by  his  authority, 
as  he  lays  to  Phocas  the  blood  of  Mauritius  and  his  seven  children, 
on  the  principle,  eut7a«7|)cr  after  urn, /octV/Mfrw.  He  does  himself 
what  he  does  by  an  other.  The  said  Phocas  did  afterwards,  Barronius 
bein^a  faithful  witness,  give  the  title  of  universal  bishop  to  Boniface, 
Gregory's  successor,  and  who  can  infer  any  tiling  else  from  all  the 
circumstances,  than  I  have  done  ?!  ,     .      ^ 

I  thought  the  gentleman  was  about  to  produce  authority  to  prove 
that  Sylvester  did  call  the  council  of  Nice.  This,  I  again  assert  he 
cannot  do.  If  he  think  he  can,  let  him  attempt  it,  and  we  will  show 
he  cannot.  We,  however,  do  assert  on  the  authority  of  Eusebius,  and 
all  ancient  history,  that  Constantine  the  ereat  did  call  the  council  of 
Nice ;  and  we  affirm  on  equal  authority,  that  the  pope's  legate  did  no/ 
preside  in  that  council.  Whether  Hosios  did  is  problematical.  It  is 
'  Inferred  from  the  feet  of  his  being  present:  but  there  is  no  historic 
authority  for  it.  But  all  this  is  very  subordinate  and  of  little  value. 
The  whole  question  rests  upon  the  inquiry,  JVhat  office  had  Peter? 
What  was  his  ecclesiastical  power  and  patronage!  Was  Pet«r  the 
prince  of  the  apostles  1  Was  he  made  the  vicar  of  Chnsti  Ay,  this 
IS  the  question !    It  requires  explicit^nay,  positive  scripture  authon- 

ty — where  is  it?  ,  -        •         t    l  n 

The  gentleman  offers  several  passages  to  this  point.  I  shall  exa- 
mine the  prominent  texts,  and  begin  with  the  16th  chapter  of  Mat- 
thew.—I  read  from  Griesbach's  Greek  Testament.  In  this  chapter, 
Christ  asks  his  disciples  the  question,  "Who  do  men  say  that  I  miiI 
and  afterwards  asks  them,  "  But  who  say  ye  that  I  am  ?  and  Peter 
answered:  "Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God  ;  "and 
Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  blessed  are  you,  Simon  Baijona, 
for  flesh  and  blood  has  not  revealed  it  to  you,  but  my  Father,  who 
is  in  heaven :  and  I  say  also  to  you,  that  you  are  Peter,  and  upon  tku 
rock  I  will  build  my  congregation  and  the  gates  of  hades  shall  not 
prevail  against  it."     Matth.  xvi.  13—18.        _  ,  ,  . 

"  Upon  this  rock :"  was  Peter  this  rock  1  The  words  sound  much 
alike,  (Petro*  and  Petra).  Let  us  examine  the  passage.  One  of  the 
internal  evidences  of  the  truth  of  the  apostolic  writings  is,  that  each 
writer  has  something  peculiar  to  himself.  So  has  every  speaker  and 
teacher,  that  has  appeared  amongst  men.  Jesus  Christ  himself  had 
hib  peculiar  characteristics.  One  of  his  peculiarities  most  clearly 
marked  by  the  four  evangelists  is,  that  he  consecrated  every  scene 
and  cireumstance  and  topic  of  conversation  to  religion  or  morality.  A 
few  examples,  out  of  many  that  might  be  given,  must  suffice.  When 
standing  by  the  sea  of  Galilee,  he  says  to  the  fishermen,  who  were 
easting  their  nets  into  the  sea :  "  follow  me,  and  I  will  make  you 
Ji$her9of  metu**  At  the  well  of  Samaria,  ho  says  to  a  Samaritan  wom- 
an, from  whom  he  asked  a  drink— ^'  Whoever  shall  drirk  of  this  wa- 
ler  shall  thirst  again ;  but  whoever  drinks  of  the  watei  that  I  shah 
eive  him,  shall  never  thirst:  but  it  shall  be  in  him  a  well  of  water 
springing  up  to  eternal  life."  While  with  his  disciples  m  the 
temple,  and  seeing  the  sheep  going  up  to  be  sacrificed,  he  says :  "  My 
sheep  hear  my  voice,  and  they  follow  me;"  and  he  speaks  of  himselt 
as  the  true  shepherd,  who  lays  down  his  life  for  his  sheep.  His  di* 
ciples  having  forgotten  to  take  bread,  when  embarking  on  the  likH 
and  when  talking  about  it,  he  took  occasion  to  say :  "  Beware  ol  tha 


84 


DKBATS  Oir  TlIS 


BOMJLN    CATHOLIC    BSLI610N. 


85 


leaTim  of  tlie  Pharisees.**    Wheii  on  Mount  Olivot,  tmon^  tlie  fines 
ami  oliTes,  lie  nays,  **  I  am  the  trae  vine,  and  my  Father  is  the  Tins- 


.*•  And  when  looking^  at  the  temple,  he  says :  **  Destroy  this 
temple,  and  I  will  build  it  in  three  days." — So  in  the  passage  before 
ns.  He  asks  his  disciples  an  all  important  question,  in  rep*y  to  wbich, 
one  of  Ihem  who  happens  to  be  named  Feter,  utters  the  great  truth, 
upon  which  he  is  to  found  his  church  forever :  **  Thou  art  the  Christ, 
(th«  Mcssiam),  th«  Son  or  thk  living  God."  Jesus  turns  to  him 
and  says:  **1iiou  art  gionct  and  upon  this  rock  (on  this  great  truth 
vhich  flesh  and  blood  has  not  revealed  to  thee),  I  will  build  my 
church." 

Et  m*  IltT^flf,  mt  vrt  Tsewr*  tji  flrrrj* — **  «t  iw  Petrm^  km  epi  taute  te  petra^ 
— »*  You  are  Peter  and  upon  this  pefra^*  strikes  the  ear  of  a  Grecian  as 
*  thou  art  stone  and  upon  this  rock*  strikes  the  ear  of  an  English  man; 
and  as  we  have  seen  is  a  part  of  the  Savior*8  peculiarity. 

The  construction  of  language  requires  that  uie  word  **  /At«"  should 
refer  to  something  antecedent  different  from  thou,  or  you.  They  are 
different  in  permm  and  in  ease.  But  not  only  does  the  8avior*s  peculiar 
characteristics,  and  the  change  of  person  from  "  /Aoi*"  the  personal, 
to  IAm  the  demonstrative,  fix  the  sense :  but  other  considerations  of 
great  moment,  forbid  any  other  interpretation.  For  let  me  ask,  why 
did  J»i  ')  propound  the  question  to  his  apostles— why  did  he  elici* 
from  them  so  great  a  truth,  if  in  the  solemn  declaration  which  imme 
diately  follti^s,  he  meant  to  fiass  by  that  truth  and  all^ide  to  Petei 
alone.  This  woold  be  a  solecism  unprecedented — a  case  unparalleled 
ITie  whole  author!^  of  the  christian  religion  and  all  its  excellency  k 
embraced  in  the  radical  ideas  which  had  been  for  the  first  tim6  pro- 
nounced by  the  lips  of  man.  There  are,  indeed,  but  three  cardinal 
ideas  in  all  christian  doctrine :  for  there  can  he  but  three  cardinal 
ideas  about  any  being*  Two  of  these  are  distinctly  embodied  in  Pe- 
ler*s  i^nfession  of  faith.  The  whole  three  are,  1st  the  person,  2nd 
the  office,  and  3rd  the  character  of  Christ.  Beyond  these— perxon 
jpee  and  doMider,  what  eoiieeption  can  mortals  have  of  our  Redeemer  ! 
Peter  mouthed  of  these,  the  two  which  gave  value  to  the  third — ^The 
permm  and  the  mission  of  Jesus.  He  was  the  first  mortal  who,  dis- 
tinctly and  intelligibly  avowed  the  faith,  in  the  person  and  mission  of 
Jesus  the  Nasuene,  u|H>n  which  the  empire  of  the  ransomed  race 
shall  stand  forever.  This  is  the  good  confession  spoken  by  Jesus 
himself  at  the  hazard  of  his  life,  before  Pontius  Pilate,  of  which 
Paul  speaks  in  trnns  of  the  highest  admiration. 

This  great  truth  deservedly  stands  forward  under  the  bold  meta- 
phor of  the  Rock.  But  still  more  creditable  to  this  triith,— not  **  flesh 
mid  blood,"  but  the  Heavenly  Father  first  uttered  it  from  Heaven.  On 
the  hanks  of  the  Jordan,  when  Jesus  had  honored  his  Father  in  his 
t»apttsm,  his  Father  honored  him ;  and  was  it  not  worthy  to  be  honor- 
ed hy  proclaiming  it  from  the  opening  sky,  "  This  is  my  Son,  the  6e- 
Imeiin  whom  I  delight,^  while  the  descending  Dove  marked  him 
out  ?    A  Pagan  poet  said, 

"  Ni^vrr  introduce  a  (Jijd  unlets  upon  nn  ocra^ion  worthy  of  hini:"* 

And  who  feels  not  the  propriety  of  such  an  introduction  here ;  for 
when  first  spoken,  no  angel  in  heaven,  nor  man  on  earth,  could  intro- 
duce the  Messiah,  in  his  proper  person,  but  his  own  Father.    No%i, 

•  liec  Bciia  lutenil  aU  digwu  vkidice  nodm-  -Inciderit.— //or. 


beeanse  Peter  was  the  first  to  utter  it,  Jesus  says  to  him:  "  I  will  give 
to  TOtt  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  whatever  you  shall 
bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven,  and  whatever  you  shall  loose 
on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven." 

What  a  controversy  there  has  been  about  these  keys.    Jesus  gave 
Ihem  to  Peter  ilone— not  to  him,  his  heirs,  and  successors  forever !    I 
was  denoted  as  heterodox  a  few  years  since,  because  I  alleged  that 
the  opening  of  the  reign  or  kingdom  of  heaven,  by  Peter  to  Jews  and 
Gentiles,  was  the  true  exposition  of  the  keys.     But  I  am  glad  to  see 
this  view  promulaed  now  from  various  reputable  sources,  even  from 
Trinity  College,  'Dublin.    Peter  opened  the  kingdom  of  heaven  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  by  divulging  a  secret  never  told  to  that  day, 
▼iz.   "  Let  all  the  house  of  Israel  know  assuredly  that  God  has 
made  that  Jesus,  whom  you  crucified,  both  Lord  and  Christ."    This 
annunciation  of  the  coronation,  or  (Gristing,  that  is  anointing  of  Je- 
sus king  and  governor  of  the  universe,  was  a  new  revelation  made  on 
the  Pentecostian  mom  by  Peter.     He  declared  remission  on  that  day 
to  3000  souls,  and  introduced  them  into  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah 
Again,  when  it  pleased  God  to  visit  the  Gentiles  in  the  family  of 
Cornelius,  a  Roman  centurion;  an  angel  sent  from  heaven,  command- 
ed him  to  send  for  Peter  to  Joppa  to  come  and  tell  him  and  ^s/ela- 
tions  ^'words  hy  which  himself  and  his  friends  might  be  saved.      He 
did  so.   He  sent,  and  Peter  came.    Why  thus  call  upon  Peter  1    Be- 
cause Christ's  gifts  are  without  repentance.    He  had  given  him  the 
keys.     He  therefore  must  open  the  two-leaved  gate,  and  intrc^uce 
both  Jews  and  Gentiles  into  the  kingdom.    This  being  once  done, 
needs  not  to  be  repeated.    The  gales  of  heaven  have  not  since  been 
locked.    There  is  no  more  use  for  the  keys.    Peter  has  them  yet. 
He  took  them  to  heaven  with  him.     He  did  not  will  them  to  any  heir 
or  successor.    The  popes  are  fighting  for  shadows.    Heaven  never 
trusted  such  gentry  with  the  keys.    They  might  take  into  their  heads 
to  lock  the  heretics  out.    1  thank  God  that  he  gave  them  to  Peter, 
that  Peter  opened  the  gates  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  us  all,  and 
that  as  the  popes  cannot  shut  them,  we  do  not  need  them  a  second 
lime.    Peter  will  guard  them,  till  he  who  has  the  key  of  David,  who 
opens  and  none  can  shut,  will  appear  a  second  time.    Thus  we  dis- 
pose rationally,  and  I  think  scripturally,  of  this  grand  text. 

The  next  text  upon  which  confidence  is  placed  by  my  opponent,  is 
where  Christ  says  to  Peter,  "  Feed  my  sheep,  feed  my  lambs. 
Language  has  no  meaning  but  from  the  context.  Every  word  serves 
to  fix  the  meaning  of  its  contextural  associates.  We  must  read  the 
21st  chapter  of  John's  Testimony,  from  the  beginning,  if  we  would 
correctly  understand  this  passage.  The  facts  are:  Peter  and  some 
of  his  brethren  had  returned  to  Galilee,  disconcerted  and  overwhelm- 
ed with  the  events  of  the  day.  They  felt  themselves  destitute,  forea 
ken,  and  in  need.  While  their  master  was  with  Uiem  he  provided 
for  them  in  some  way.  He  could  say,  when  I  sent  you  without  scrip 
or  staff  or  money,  did  you  lack  any  thing  1  They  answered,  no.  but 
he  was  gone,  and  they  knew  not  what  to  do.  In  this  distress,  i'eter 
says  "  I  am  going  a  fishing,"  and  the  rest  accompany  him  :  but  they 
toUed  all  night  and  caught  nothing.  In  the  morning  they  see  the  Sa- 
vior walking  on  the  shore;  they  know  him  not.  He  says  to  them, 
**  Children,  have  you  any  meat?"  They  answer, **no.  He  te.ls  them 
Ui  cast  on  the  other  side  of  the  bark.  They  do  so  and  take  a  large 
H 


BSBATI  ON  THE 


munliif  of  itk  Poter,  when  he  knew  it  >ti  <8  the  Lord,  gfVt  his  hsh* 
erman^s  garment  aroond  him,  leaped  into  the  lake,  &nd  swam  ashore. 
They  dine  together,  and  after  they  had  eaten  to  satiety,  Jesus  says  to 
PeleSy  ^Ih  f  oi»  bwe  me  more  than  ikete  T* 

Hy  mMtmction  of  these  words  Is,  **Do  you  love  me  more  thai 
lHum  i«h,  or  these  victuals."  He  then  says  to  Peter,  **Feed  mv 
lambs  :'*  and  the  fact  before  him  and  all  the  circumstances  say,  I  wili 
feed  you* 

The  bishop^s  construction  is,  "Do  you  lore  me  more  than  these  dia- 
ctples  love  me!"  But  how  could  Peter  answer  such  a  question! 
Wat  he  omniscient  to  know  how  much  his  companions  loved  his  nriaa* 
ter.  In  that  case  he  would  have  said,  "Lord  I  love  thee,  but  I  do  not 
know  how  much  my  brethren  love  thee;  they  also  love  thee,  but  I 
know  not  whether  I  love  tbeo  mtire  than  they  do.**  But  suppose  he 
QonM  hmrn  known,  then  I  ask,  was  it  comely  to  ask  so  invidious  s 
fMilion  t  Would  not  they  have  felt  themselves  disparaged,  if  Peter 
Mil  aaid,  ''Yea  Lord,  I  love  th«e  more  than  all  my  fellow  apostlea  love 
the©  !!!*• 

Peter  had  erred.  He  had  become  discontented — ^had  forgotten  hia 
duty  to  his  master,  and  had  betaken  himself  to  his  former  occupation 
of  fishing,  and  induced  tie  rest  to  join  him.  Christ  asks  him  sol- 
emnly, "  Do  you  love  me  more  than  these  fish,  these  boats,  nets,  ap- 
paratus, or  these  victuals,  this  worldly  employment!  if  so,  cease  to 
spend  your  time  in  providing  food  for  yourself;  but  feed  my  sheep 
and  lambs,  and  I  will  provide  for  you.*'  Besides,  he  having  cauffht 
iMtliinf  till  the  Master  appeared,  was  a  very  striking  lesson,  which  I 
piesume  Peter  never  forgot.    I  confess,  I  think  the  gentleman's  inter- 

C rotation  of  theip  as  bishops,  and  lamb*  as  laity,  most  singularly  ar^ 
itiary  and  fimtasti?,  and  needs  not  a  grave  reply.  So  we  dispose  of 
•he  second  grand  l»xt  on  which  the  church  of  Rome  has  leaned  with 
in  mwh  confidence  for  so  many  ages^ 

■y  leaned  opponent  has  not  yet  afforded  us  evidence  for  his  as- 
mmption  of  official  supremacy  for  Potior.  These  texts  reach  not  the 
They  do  not  institute  a  new  office  bestowed  on  Peter  but  are 
of  esteem,  for  reasons  personal.  Every  privilege  he  received 
on  account  of  some  personal  pre-eminence,  not  because  of  an  of- 
fine  which  he  held.  The  canon  law  has  decreed  that  a  personal  priv- 
ilege dolh  follow  the  person  and  is  extinguished  with  the  person. 
Now  as  all  the  honors  vouchsafed  Peter  were  in  consequence  of  his 
p«iii|itiieS8,  courage,  penitence,  seal,  &e.  they  never  can  become  the 
ioaaons  of  an  hereditaiy  office.  His  supremacy,  or  rather  superiori 
1y,  or  primacy,  most  naturally  arose  from  his  being  one  of  the  first,  if 
BOt  tktjbni  convert — ^the  oldest  of  Christ's  disciples ;  because  he  was 
prompt,  decided,  couragieous,  sealous,  ardent,  and  above  all,  he  was 
m  inanied  man,  had  a  wife  and  family.  And  although  this  fact  might 
Mil  eomport  with  Ms  being  the  fountain  of  papl  authority,  it  obtaSn- 
ed  him  an  honor  above  John  the  bachelor,  and  all  the  bachelors  of 
that  age !! 
Once  more  on  this  subject— let  me  ask,  who  made  a  more  volunta- 

3'  surrender  of  himself  to  his  master^who  more  promptly  foisook 
1  that  he  had,  than  he— who,  when  his  Lord  asked,  will  ye  also  leave 
me,  with  move  ardor  said ;  ^  Lord,  toiwiiom  shall  we  go  but  to  thee- 
for  thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life  !**    Who  more  courageously 
Id  the  time  of  peril,  drew  his  sword  to  defend  his  Master !  who,  when 


SOMAN  CATHOUC    REUOION. 


87 


the  Savior  foretold  his  own  sufferings  and  indignities,  more  aflecUoii' 
ately  and  devotedly  exclaimed,  in  the  warmth  of  his  heart,  "  Lord,  it 
shall  not  be  so  done  unto  ihee !"  ^  i .     j    . 

It  is  true  that  this  ardor  of  disposition,  this  promptness,  this  deci- 
sion of  character,  sometimes  betray  their  possessor  into  errors;  yet 
who  will  not  say,  give  me  the  man  of  energy  and  decision,  and  ardor 
of  character  1  John  was  meek  as  a  dove ;  he  was  innocent  and  amia- 
ble as  a  lamb,  and  the  Lord  loved  him ;  but  those  bold  and  stem,  and 
manly  virtues  he  wanted,  which  gave  so  much  interest  to  the  charac- 
ter  of  Peter;  and  so  admirably  fitted  him  to  stand  forward  and  fore- 
most, amongst  his  colleagues  and  fellow  apostles.— [Time  expired.] 

Haf-pad  4  o'c/ocAr,  P.  JC 
Bishop  Purcell.  riae»~ 

Do  you  love  me  more  than  these  fish !!    My  brethren,  if  the  subject 
were  not  too  serious,  I  should  call  my  friend's  construction  a  fish  story  ! 
Jesus  Christ  said  to  Peter,  »*  lovest  thou  me  more  than  these  1 '  plvM 
Ati— what,  if  fish  !  (i;t'"^)  P^^  9^"*  ^'    There  is  an  end  to  all 
that  argument.  ,  ,         ,  i        .i    ^^     i. 

Mr.  C  AMPBiLL.  That  is  the  Latin  version.  Let  us  have  the  Greek. 
Bishop  Purcell.  The  Greek  is  not  more  plain,  nor  will  it  prove 
your  interpretation  less  revolting,  less  contrary  to  the  obvious  and 
more  common  interpretation  of  the  text.  Sad  conclusion  this,  which 
my  learned  oj.ponent  reserved  as  his  main  reliance,  for  the  last  hour 
of  the  day  !  And  is  it  thus  that  he  proves  the  church  of  Rome  to  be 
neither  catholic,  apostolic,  nor  holy,  but  an  apostacy  from  the  only 
true,  holy  and  apostolic  church  of  Christ!  He  is  heartily  welcoma 
to  the  proselytes  this  argument  may  gain  to  his  tottering  cause. 
Let  learned  Protestants  now  claim  their  champion's  services  in  the 
difficult  task  of  interpreting  the  scripture— or  let  them,  as  1  have  pro- 
phesied they  would  do,  repudiate  his  advocacy. 

The  change  of  name  from  Simon  to  Peter,  shows  that  Chnst  chose 
him  to  be,  beyond  the  other  apostles,  a  roek,  or  more  firm,  more  con- 
stant, more  immoveable  than  they— and  that  forever— in  the  confession 
of  hip  divinity,  his  real  presence  with  his  church  and  all  the  other 
truths  he  had  vouchsafed  to  reveal  to  the  world.  A  rock  does  not 
melt.— The  winds  may  beat  and  the  r^ins  may  fell,  but  the  house 
built  upon  a  rock  will  stand,  not  for  a  few  years,  but  forever.  And 
as  the  rock,  in  the  physical  order  loses  not  its  natuie,  so  neither  do  the 
promises  of  Christ  lose  their  efficacy.  "  Thou  art  Peter,  (or  a  rock^ 
and  on  this  rock,  I  will  build  my  church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall 
not  prevail  against  it."  Matthew  xvi.  18. 

A  professor  of  Andover  College  has  published  a  volume,  I  think  it 
is  entitled  "  Elements  of  Sacred  Criticism."  I  have  examined  this 
work,  but  my  memory  retains  not  the  author's  name, — perhaps  some 
ic  the  learned  gentlemen  present  may  aid  it  by  the  suggestion — ^how- 
ever, he  substantiates  my  interpretation,  or  rather  that  of  all  ages,  by 
incontrovertible  argument.  And  I  confess  the  American  College  has, 
in  this  instance,  a  decided  superiority,  both  in  sound  criticism  and  or 
thodoxy,  over  the  "  dumb  sister,"  as  the  English  and  Scotch  universi- 
ties have  invidiously,  or  facetiously,  named  Trinity  College,  Dublin 
There  is  one  plausible  difficulty,  against  the  testimony  of  Peter's 
having  fixed  his  residence  at  Rome,  which  the  gentleman  has  overlook^ 
d,  viz.  that  Paul  does  not  mention  Peter  in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans. 


i 

.41' 


Ml 


DEBATE   ON    TUB 


Ti  «if lain  tliit,  it  is  on'y  iHTessary  to  obfierro,  Paul  wrote  A.  D.  57. 
in  tli«  lelgn  of  Claudius,  when  Peter  was  absent  from  Rome;  and 
this  the  illustrious  convert  of  Damascus  knew.  But  why  waste  lime 
on  a  subject  undisputed  for  fifteen  hundred  years.  Pearson,  Grotius, 
Usher,  Hammond,  Blondel,  Scaliger,  Casaubon,  DumouUn,  Petit, 
Basnage,  all  agree  that  Peter  transferred  his  see  to  Rome  and  tbero 
suffered  martyrdom.    , 

And  here  another  objeetion  is  overruled ;  he  said  there  had  been 
contests  among  the  apostles,  who  should  be  greatest.  He  said  that 
if  Peter  had  confessed  that  he  loved  him  most,  a  greater  controversy 
would  have  arisen.  But  there  was  good  cause  to  the  contrary.  An- 
drew saw  him  first — John  reposed  on  his  bosom,  &c. — for  many  rea 
sons,  these  disputes  may  have  arisen — surely  such  objections  after  so 
great  a  mass  of  testimony  deserved  not  serious  attention. 

I  have  long  a^o  seen,  in  a  Utile  mork  written  in  Philadelphia,  the 
remarks  of  my  friend  about  the  Savior's  saying  he  was  the  vine,  when 
among  the  vines,  on  mount  Olivet,  &c.  &c.  I'bis  is  not  therefore  orig- 
inal or  new. 

I  now  take  up  a  connected  argument  on  the  apostolicity  of  the  church, 
for  I  wish  this  matter  to  go  before  the  public  m  its  peculiar  strength. 
I  look  upon  it  as  the  most  powerful  argument  that  can  be  advanced  in 
fevw  of  the  Catholic  church.    I  read  from  Fletcher.   His  style  is  good. 

••  ChriHt  Jc»u»  hatl  called  the  apontles  '^shers  of  nun,*  he  b«l  told  theiti  to 
•mmmd preach  iht  gotpel  to  every  creature,"  assuriag  them,  at  the  same  tiim% 
IhH  *tmpmmr  was  driven  to  him  in  heaven,  and  on  earth,'  and  that  *  himself 
woiuld  be  always  with  them.*  Animated  hy  this  commission,  and  these  as!$urmiice«, 
■ad  irad  too  with  the  luve  of  GoJ,  and  ^n ardent  charity  for  men.  Unite,  heroic 
Vtctliut  of  b««volence.  did  *  go  forth  and  preach:  They  preached;  and  although 
the  world  with  all  its  pasiiont.  prejudi<:et  and  superstitions  was  leagued  against 
tli«n;->ftlthoiifh  its  doctrines,  which  they  preached,  were  repug^naot  to  ali  the 
Iwd  propenaities  of  the  heart,  and  eiceeded  far  the  measure  otthe  human  under- 
•tandiiir;  j«t  did  an  immense  portion  of  the  public,  of  the  corrupted  and 
the  vicious,  of  the  learned  and  the  enlig^htened,  bear  tlien,  and  believe.     71h«y 

£  reached;  and  the  lore  of  vice  was  converted  into  teal  for  innocence;  {irejudice, 
ilo  the  desire  of  truth:  supentition,  into  the  warmth  of  pietj.  Vice  itself  was 
exalted  into  the  heroism  orsanclitjr;  and  evenr  defilement  dt»iieawaj.  which  cor- 
ruption had  introduced  into  the  sanetuaij  or  the  heart,  lluy  preached;  and 
Sslsn,  lihe  n  thnndetbolt,  was  hurled  Iroiii  hit  throne;  his  templet  ra^;  hit 
overturned;  and  idolatry,  ibnsked  and  trenibltn|^,  fled  from  those  scenes, 


beheld  the  virtue  and  it  edified  them;  they  listened  to  the  wisdom,  and  it  con 
vinced  them.    In  this  manner  did  the  first  apostles  of  Jesoa  Chrtsc  completelr 
•Miiae  the  firure  of  the  ^jftthers  ^f  i»i#n,'  completely  verify  the  assurance  which 
their  divine  Master  had  given  them,  fhat  ♦  himself  would  be  always  with  them^ 
completely  illustrate  that  passage  of  St.  Paul,  in  which  he  says,  *  God  em^loM 
^  «0idl  h  eofnfbimd  the  strong,  and  the  fbolish  to  confute  the  wise:     It  is  tn 
^illflwi  mission  of  the  apostles,  which  are  the  sources  of  the  call  and  mission 
of  their  sncGessors,  and  it  is  the  successes  that  attended  the  preaching  of  the 
•polities,  thst  are  the  proof,  not  only  of  the  divinity  of  their  miision,  but  of  the 
■iision  of  those  who  have  replaced,  and  shall  vet  replace  them  till  tlie  end  of 
lime.    In  religion,  as  every  thing  was  originaify  oposioUcaU  so  everj'  thing  to 
merit  venention,  must  continue  tgitosfoHeal,    According  to  the  definition  and 
import  of  apostolicity,  it  is  necessary  that  the  church  which  was  founded  by  the 
•postles,  and  the  mission  also  which  was  imparted  to   the   apostles,  should, 
without  destruction,  or  interruption,  have  been  perpetuated  to  the  age  we  live 
m,  firm  amid  revolutions,  unchanged  amid  changes. 

I  have  said,  that  to  ascertain  in  the  Catholic  church  this  stability  of  duration, 
•  more  positive  proof  cajinot  be  adduced,  than  the  spectacle  of  iU  pastors  (who 


BOBIAN   CATHOLIC    SJCLIGION. 


89 


compose  a  large  portion  of  its  members,  and  whose  functions  are  the  most  im» 
portent  duties  of  religion)  regulaily  in  each  age,  succeeding  to  each  other,  and 
transmitting  to  each,  the  mission  which  originally  had  been  inherited  from  the 
hands  of  the  apostles.    The  only  difficulty  here,  is  by  the  light  of  evidence  to 
establish  these  important  tacts.     Well,  my  brethren,  and  this  is  what,  without 
any  difficulty,  the  Catholic  exults  to  do.    To  do  it  we  need  only  to  consult  the 
records  of  history;  those  records  which  the  Protestant  himself  considers  authentic. 
The  light  of  hbtory  is  a  testimonv,  which,  beyond  the  power  of  reasonable  doubt, 
attests  the  regular  and  perennial  succession  of  the  Catholic  ministij.  ^ 

The  apostles,  whom  Christ  had  sent,  ms  his  Fathef  had  sent  htm;  and  with 
whom,  likewise,  he  had  promised  to  remain  all  days  to  the  end  of  the  world;  m 
consequence  of  the  above  conuuission  and  assurance,  chose  for  themselves  co- 
operators  and  successors  in  their  sacred  ministry  :—co-<jp«fi«<or5,  in  order  to 
assist  them  in  the  government  of  the  churches  which  their  seal  had  planted ;— - 
BuceessorSf  to  whom,  on  occasion  of  their  departure  torn  this  scene  of  their 
labors,  they  might  resign  the  burden  of  their  functions,  and  the  honor  of  their 
sees.    Now,  fortunately  for  the  cause  of  religion,  we  have  in  the  annals  of 
history,  and  in  the  writings  of  the  learned,  the  accounts  very  carefully  preserved, 
of  the  resignations,  which  the  apostles  made  of  their  functions  and  sees  to  their 
successors;  and  of  the  resignations  also  which  their  successors'  successors  made, 
during  a  series  of  ages,  to  the  pastors,  who,  in  long  order,  have  till  the  present 
age,  continually  replaced  each  other.    Among  these  accounts,  that  which  of  all 
others  is  the  most  interesting,  and  which  religion  has  preserved  with  the  nicest 
care, is  the  history  of  the  continuation  until  to-day,  of  the  apostolic  powers  which 
Christ  Jesus  cbnterred  upon  the  prince  of  the  apostles,  St.  Peter.    We  have, 
thanks  to  that  Providence,  which  watches  over  the  church,  and  which  marks  its 
paths  with  beams  of  light,  we  have  the  proof  of  this  continuation  so  luminously 
attested,  so  evident,  that  not  hostility  can  contest,  nor  incredulity  doubt  it. 
Important  testimony!  itself  a  bright  feature  in  the  divinity  of  the  church;  a  tes- 
timony, which,  proving  immediately  the  apostolicity  of  the  mission  of  iU  supreme 
pastors,  proves  also  immediately,  yet  directly,  the  apostolicity  of  the  mission  of 
all  its  other  pastors.    For,  if  you  consult  the  rolls  of  history,  you  will  find  that 
with  our  supreme  pastors,  the  Catholic  pastors  of  every  age,  and  of  every  nation, 
were  always  united  In  communion;  acknowledging  their  supereminence,  and 
revering  their  jurisdiction;  considering^  them  as  the  great  source,  after  Christ, 
of  spiritual  power,  and  the  centre  of  spiritual  unity. 

iliere  have  been  several  distinguished  writers,  who,  incapable  of  misrepresen- 
tation, and  possessing  the  means  of  knowing  the  history  of  the  successors  of  St. 
Peter,  and  the  order  of  their  succession,  have  carefully  handed  down  to  us,  each 
to  his  own  time,  the  lists  of  these  illustrious  men.    The  first  of  these  I  believe, 
who  is  known  to  have  preserved  the  important  catalogue,  is  St.  Ireoaeus. 

After  Tertollian,  the  next  who  continues  the  catalogue  of  St.  Peter's  succes- 
sors, ii  St.  Optatus.    He  brings  it  down  to  the  time  of  Siricius;  that  is,  to  the 
year  three  hundred  and  eighty-four.    •  In  this  one  cfeotV,'  says  the  saint,  speak' 
ing  of  the  see  of  Rome,  *sat  Peter  first, to  him  succeeded  Linus,  to  him  Clement, 
ic. .....  1h  tiberius  succeeded  Damasus;  to  Damasus,  Hiricius,  the  present 

pontiff,  with  whom  we  and  all  the  world  hold  communion.  And  now:  he  adds, 
addressing  himself  exultingly  to  the  Donatist,  *and  now,  do  yoa give  an  account 
of  the  origin  ^yoursees,yoa,  that  pretend  to  caUyourselves  the  Cathohc  church, 

rcontra  Parnien.)  ,    ,       .  , . 

St.  Austin  is  another  writer,  who  had  attended  to  the  succession,  and  has  preserv- 
ed for  us,  the  list  ofSt.  Peter's  successors;  derivinr  from  the  long  order  of  their  con 
tinuance,  the  same  conclusions  as  did  Irenaeus,  Tertullian,  and  Optatus.  The  list 
which  the  Saint  has  communicated,  reaches  down  to  his  own  time,  to  the  pontifi- 
cate of  Innocent  the  first,  in  the  year  four  hundred  and  two,  and  in  its  earlier 
tras  it  exactly  corresponded  with  the  list  which  I  have  alluded  to  already. 
•  Come,*  says  he  to  the  Donatists,  •come,  brethren,  if  it  be  that  you  wish  to  be  in- 
grahed  on  the  vine.  1  weep  to  see  you  as  you  are;  lapped  off  from  Us  9<Kred 
stock.  Count  up  the  pontiffs  in  the  chair  of  Peter,  antfin  that  order  see  whteh 
succeeded  which.    This  is  that  Rock,  over  which,  the  pro  ud  gates  of  hell  eannnt 

Hence,  without  the  necessity  of  producing  further  testimonies,  it  follows,  if 
men  will  not  contest  the  authority,  or  call  m  question  the  veracity  of  some  of 
the  fairest  characters,  that  the  christian  world  reveres:  it  follows  that  from  the 
H  3  l»  ' 


\  ii 


DKBATB  ON  TOM 

liM  of  St  Peter  to  the  time  of  Innocent,  in  the  fifth  centmy,  there  existed  m 
the  lee  of  Romet  an  nnintemipted  chwn  of  pastors,  and  a  contmaatioo  of  aji 
npottolic  ini«ion.  The  continuation  of  that  Mine  apottohc  miaiion  which  Chrirt 
ie«ia  had  imparted  to  St,  Peter.  Onlj  he,  can  doubt  this,  whose  locrednhtjr 
dm^hli  of  CYery  thinC' 

Aad  hu  the  chain  of  Roman  pastors,— for  this  is  now  the  only  point  which  we 
■Mst  lavestigBte,— been  continued  and  extended  from  the  time  of  Innocent  the 
fffSt,  to  the  present  daj;  an  iotcrrat.  it  is  true,  extremely  long,  and  filled  ap  with 
■lOIHHitand  cbanres,  and  revolutions  and  ^reat  events?  Yes,  the  chain  has  been 
continued  and  extended  all  this  whole  length  of  period;  from  Innocent,  who 
consoled  the  great  Chiysostom.  under  the  persecution  of  an  ambitious  princess, 
to  Pius  the  seventh,  who  himself  is  Ihe  heroic  victim  of  the  persecution  of  a  re- 
lentless  victor.  Indee4  the  ftiSt  b  so  obvious,  it  is  not  even  contested.  It  is 
conceded  bj  the  men,  wlao  are  interested  to  deny  it.  To  be  assured  of  it,  yo« 
need  only  to  consult  the  political  annals  of  any  considerable  state,  or  to  appeal 
m  oar  historians  to  the  mere  tablets  of  chronologY.  Yon  will  find  that  all  rive 
to  our  Roman  pontiis  the  same  line  and  length  of  succession,  which  I  here 
assign  them.  Their  conduct  has  been  always  prominent;  their  influence  always 
conspicaoas.  Few  were  the  great  events  and  transactions,  in  which,  eithei 
from  a  pioctple  of  {Ncty,  or  sometimes  of  ambition,  they  did  not  bear  a  part. 

Yes,  out  if  prompted  by  curiosity,  you  will  give  yourselves  the  trouble  to  con 
Mit  the  anoab  of  the  church,  there  you  will  trace,  more  distinctly  still,  the  evi 
dence  of  the  truth,  which  I  am  now  establisbine.    There  attending  to  the  occur 
rences  of  each  epoch,  you  will  observe,  that  the  helm  which  had  been  confided 
to  the  trust  of  Peter,  is  with  the  peatest  regularitjr  transferred  from  band  to 
hand;  and  with  pious  care,  confided  to  the  trust  or  each  successor.    You  may 
mark  the  name,  and  read  the  character  of  each  individual,  who  directed  it,  the 
dhte  of  the  day  when  it  was  committed  to  his  guidance;  and  the  hour,  almost, 
when  he  resigned.    In  short,  admitting  the  accuracy  of  the  lisU  which  have  been 
preserved  by  Irenaens,  Tertulllan,  Ac.,  you  trace  in  the  annals  of  the  church,  a 
'     r  plain,  and  incontestible  evidence  of  a  line  of  Roman  pontiffs,  the  sncces 

._  of  St.  Poter,  during  the  lo^g  course  of  above  eirfateen  hundred  years. 

If  the  aiseient  lathers,  in  their  tiuMn,  Mid  at  the  distance  only  of  a  few  years 
BO  triumphantly  produced  the  list  of  these  holy  men,  evincing  by  it  the  divinity 
of  the  church,  and  the  apostolicity  of  the  mission  of  its  pastors,  and  bv  it  confu 
ting  the  novelty  and  claims  of  heresy;  if  Tertullian,  impressed  with  the  force  of 
iliaatgiMient,  victoriously  called  out  to  the  hosts  of  innovators,  "  sfuta  u»  oiiy 
Itliiir  Me  tkU,  Ui^M  mmi  9hem  m  the  ort^tn  cfymrehmxkea;  ihew  uttkeUH 
ff  four  HtAcft.  m  rmvihr  wdtr  frvm  ihe  days  ifihM  tfottUa,  tutcteUng  to 
iocA  9lktrr  if  be  could  say  to  them,  *•  IVko  are  you?  Whence  U  your  origin  de- 
'Wimdf  WImt  hme  you  to  do  in  iii|  ctfiile?  Mem  tkefomeuor.  My  /otset- 
ifaslf  flMcifiil.  /  em  the  heir  of  ike  iqwtfict .***  if  he  could  say  all  this;  and 
from  this,  after  scarcely  the  lapse  of  two  centuries  and  the  succession  of  hardlv 
•  dmen  pontiffs,  demonstrate  the  apostolicity  of  the  church;  with  how  much 
more  reason  and  with  how  much  more  effect,  might  I,  or  any  other  Catholic, 
demonstrate  its  apostolicity  at  present,  at  present  when  the  continuance  of  Pe- 
iief§  successors  rorms  a  chain,  of  above  ewhteen  hundred  years,  and  their  num« 
ber  fills  up  a  list  of  above  two  hnndred  and  fifty  pontiA?  Oh !  were  only  a  Ter- 
tullian now,  or  an  Austin,  standing  in  the  same  sitvation  in  which  I  am  placed 
before  you,  addressing  yon  from  this  seat  of  truth  and  pressing  the  same  argu- 
ment, which  I  do  to  oar,  upon  your  attention;  and  pressing  it  recommended  by 
the  circumstances  which  I  have  just  referred  to,  how  the  thoughts  would  g^ow, 
and  the  words  bum,  with  which  ' 
ingi  lo  fou!  How  the  cause  of 

fpfil  vsAMibled  enthusiasm  would  i     ,  ^  _         _ 

Uttf"  li  reality,  if  the  argument  which  these  great  men  have  employed  to 
prove  the  apostoficitv  of  the  church,  proved  aught  in  their  times,  it  certainly 
moves  the  same,  and  a  great  deal  more,  at  presentv 

To  the  thoughtful  and  the  philosophic  mind,  there  is  much,  I  have  already  ob- 
served, to  admire  in  the  stability  ot  the  church  amid  the  fluctuation  of  human 
things.  It  is  the  same  in  regard  to  the  lon^  continuance  of  the  successors  of  St. 
Peter.  Wisdom  and  reason,  when  they  consider  it,  are  struck  with  wonder  ; 
and  f4ety  discovers  in  it  the  visible  effect  of  an  Almighty  superintendance.  Tho 
InstilQtaons  of  men  soon  perish.    The  niod'tications  of  hnman  policy  do  not  bug 


ROMAN   CATHOUC    RELIGION. 


91 


reUin  their  forms.    Nothing  human  is  permanent    To  contemplate,  therefore,  an 
order  of  pontiffs  reaching  the  whole  length  of  eighteen  centuries  uncbanged. 
whilst  every  thing  else  was  changing;  uninterrupted,  whilst  all  other  institutions 
were  perishingr-is  a  spectacle  at  once  striking  awful,  and  impressive  ;  calculat- 
ed to  inspire  the  protestant  himself,  if  not  with  the  conviction  of  Us  divinity,  at 
least  with  a  conviction  of  its  wisdom  ;  with  a  respect  for  its  strength  ;  with  a 
veneration  for  its  antiquity.    Let  only  reason  cast  a  look  into  the  annals  of  time^, 
or  recall  to  iU  recollection  the  events  and  revolutions,  which  during  the  lapse  ot 
eighteen  centuries,  have  taken  placeon  the  theatre  of  life.    During  that  internal 
ineverv  kingdom  of  the  civilixed  world,  every  government  has  changed  its  form  , 
every  dynasty  resigned  its  power  ;  every  empire  sunk  to  ruin.     Rome  'tself.  dur- 
ine  It,  has  experienced  in  particular,  all  the  vicissitudes  of  human  instability  : 
I  u  been  ruleS  alternately  by  Consuls,  Emperors,  Kings  and  Exarchs  :  has  been 
taken,  plundered,  sacked  and  reduced  almost  to  a  heap  of  ashes.    In  short,  during 
it.  every  thinic  that  is  human  and  political.— the  work  of  the  power  and  anibition. 
©f  the  wisdom  and  art  of  men,  has  either  perished  or  undergone  a  variety  ol  al- 
terations—Kingdoms, states,  cities,  monuments,  laws,  opinions,  customs,  here- 
sies.    Nought  but  the  succession  of  our  pontiff's,  and  the  institutions  of  our  holy 
relieion,  hive  remained  unaltered.    These  alone,  amid  the  general  revolution  ; 
amid  the  storms  of  war  ;  the  ravages  of  passion  ;  the  conflicts  of  heresy,  subsist 
undecayedsnd  um'.ecaying.    They  even  subsist  in  spite  of  all  those   evils; 
thourh  assailed  by  the  violence  of  persecution  ;  though  combated  by  the  machi- 
nations of  passion  ;  though  attackecl  by  the  artifices  of  error  ;  though  assaulted  bv 
the  combined  efforts  of  vice.  Satan  and  the  world.     Surely  prejudice  itself  will 
own  it.— a  succession  of  Pastors  thus  perpetuated  for  eighteen  centurie8,and  per- 


memoa  oi"  accounting  rationally  .«»  ..,•"  '^  — -••»  — . : —  .  t»  j 

institution  ;  and  the  consequence  of  that  assurance  given  by  ourgreat  Redeemer 
to  his  aposUes,  that  he  would  be  with  them  all  days,  to  ihe  end  of  the  world  j^or 
in  other  words,  that  it  is  the  result  and  the  proof  of  ^n  apostolic  mtssion. 

From  the  evidences  of  the  apostolicity  of  the  church  of  Rome,  is  inferred  the 
evidence  of  the  apostolicity  of  the  various  other  Catho  ic  churches,  which  are 
disposed  throughout  the  universe.  In  reality,  they  are  all  of  them  the  parts  of 
oncwhole  ;  the  branches  of  one  tree  ;  the  streamsof  one  fountain  ;  the  rays  of 
one  son.  They  all  form  only  one  communion,  whose  centre  and  head  is  the 
church  of  Rome.  Of  these  churches,  some  were  established  by  the  apostles 
themselves,  and  their  immediate  successors  ;-some  and  a  very  considerable  part, 
by  the  successors  of  St.  Peter,  the  Roman  pontiffs,  who  in  each  age  have  with  pi- 
cas seal,  deputed  missionaries  to  preach  the  gospel  in  almost  every  region  of  the 
rldbe  But  in  every  age,  and  in  every  region,  the  churches  that  were  thus 
rlanted,  were  only  considered  as  apostolical,  or  as  portions  of  the  true  church, 
From  thi  evidence^  of  their  union  with  the  church  o|  Rome.  It  is  the  reirmrk  of 
St.  Jerome;  that  no  bishop  was  ever  acknowledged  to  be  a  lawful  bishop, 
except  in  as  much,  as  he  was  united  in  communion  with  ihe  cliair  of  Sit. 

And  why  may  I  not  adduce  as  another  evidence  of  the  apostolic  mission  of 
our  pastors,  the  venerable  subsistence  of  a  multitude  of  other  churches,   which 
withouthaving  lasted  from  the  age,  which  saw  the  apostles  live,  have  still  lastea 
from  the  ages  that  are  not  long  subsequent  to  it  T    this  is  the  case  with  severa 
Churches  in  Spain,  Italy,  France.  &c.     In  Spain,  the  churches  of  Toledo,  Cordo 
ve,  &c.  in  Itely,  those  of  Milan,  Naples.  &c.  in  France,  those  of  Lyons,  Tours 
Ac  have  subsisted  from  the  early  ages  of  christian  fervor ;  from  those  ages  which 
lire  often  denominated  apostolical,  down  to  the  present  period  of  degeneracv 
Their  annals,  more  accurately  preserved  than  the  annals  ot  civil  governmenis 
exhibit  to  our  astonished,  but  gratified  reason,  a  line  of  pastors  during  this  whole 
lenrthofaices— unbroken  and  uninterrupted— uninjured  by  the  violence  ot  per- 
secutions, as  well  as  unimpaired  by  the  sunshine  of  prosperity  ;  a  line  of  pastors 
that  in  canonical  succession   have   till   the  present   day,  replaced    each  other. 
These  are  monuments  of  stnbility,  compared  with  which  profane   history  hHS 
n3thinff  similar  ;  Protestantism  nothing  analogous.  These  too  attest  the  apostol- 
Kity  of  the  mission  of  our  pastors  ;  and  the  apostolicity   consequently  of  our 
c-/ir.h.  Aud  now  once  more,let  it  berecollected,  in  relation  toall  thesechurches 
Ibsi  their  founders,  and  the  successors  of  their  founders,  were  in  communion  with 


^U3»udMkB^MU 


DEBATE  Oil  mS 


tiM  •««  of  Rome:— the  former  depated  perhaps  immedi«ielj  bj  it ;  the  latter  ei 
■iiiliK  iliwijri  in  flieir  union  with  it  as  the  beat  proof  of  the  apoatoliciljr  of  then 
own  uelesratioR.** 

f  The  above  quotation  was  rmi  Jo  puti,  in  two  diflereut  apeocbei;  but  it  has  beea 
tboafbl  Mropar  to  in^rt  it  entire,  bare.]  ,,      .      /•  i^   j       t    *  j 

I  clfiS*  Mere.  To-morrow  is  the  sabbath  of  our  God.  Let  us  de- 
vote the  remainder  of  the  day  to  the  preparaUott  of  out  souls  for  its 
holy  duties. 


MONDAY,  Jamwaey  16th,  Half  pad  9  o\!nek^  A.  M. 

Mm.  Camfbeix  rites- 
It  is  a  trite  and  a  true  ohserration,  that  the  material  universe  is  re- 
solvable into  a  very  few  elementary  principles.  And  not  a  few  of  our 
wisest  philosophers  suppose  that  the  time  may  yet  come,  in  the  pro- 
mss  of  chemical  science,  when  material  nature  will  be  resolved  into 
some  two,-or  three  rudimentary  elements.  The  sciences,  too,  mental 
and  moral,  are  all  resolvable  into  a  few  great  cardinal  principles. 

The  papal  empire  itself  depends  also  upon  a  few  points,  indeed,  up- 
on one  great  point,  and  thai  relates  to  the  office  upon  which  the  whole 
superstructure  rests.  The  most  fundamental  question  is  not  whether 
the  apostle  Peter  was  invested  with  the  office  of  pope,  or  vicar  of 
Christ ;  but  rather  whether  there  ever  was  mek  an  office  at  all.  On  this 
question  we  have  not  proceeded  in  the  most  logical  manner.  1  have 
been  compelled  to  approach  it  at  different  times,  and  by  different  ave- 
lilies,  my  opponent  has  not  adverted  to  the  rules  of  this  discussion. 
I  am  compelled  to  lead,  and  he  to  follow.  He  can  only  lawfully  reply 
to  such  matter  as  I  introduce.  But  instead  of  replying  to  my  ar^* 
-miBtf,  ftlraady  offered,  he  read  you  some  dissertations  upon  succession 
ti>  m  oile©,  not  yet  canvassed  and  established.  This  reading  of  for- 
eign  discussions  instedl  of  replving  to  me  is  contrary  to  our  rules  and 
roost  illogical.  I  hope  we  shall  have  no  more  of  it.  What  was  read 
on  Saturday  afternoon  on  the  question  of  succession  is  clearly  irrele- 
vanL  Before  we  contend  about  succession,  the  question  is.  What  is 
to  he  tioeeeded  to  I  We  have  had  seven  presidents,  and  the  succes- 
sion is  indisputable;  yet  the  offieo  depends  not  upon  the  seven  incum- 
hoits,  nor  upon  their  rightful  succession ;  hut  upon  what  is  written  m 
Iht  eiwwititioo— opon  the  positive  and  express  instttnUon  of  the  office. 
If  it  is  not  found  in  the  constitution,  succession  is  of  no  virtue : 
however  unbroken  and  oideriy  it  may  be,  the  present  incumbent  has 
no  power.  The  grand  question  then  is,  h  there  in  ike  ewsttiulum  of 
lie  CkriMtian  ehmk^  in  ike  New  Owefuml,  or  Uui  Daiamenij  a  ckaif 
^pdmaevj  or  mperinienieneyf  This  is  the  logical  and  the  cardinal 
qnwition.  On  this  single  point  rest  all  the  fortunes  of  the  papacy  in 
an  enlightened  community.  1  wish  all  to  perceive  it,  and  I  will  pre- 
sent  it  in  different  forms.  The  first  question  is,  ifiii  Jetm  CJtmJ  iw- 
poinied  the  oMu  tfpopef  The  second.  Who  wm  iktfirtiqffieerl  Third, 
Woi  there  a  meeeMnm  oritdmAt  and  fourth,  Hm  ikai  tueeemon  been 
mmmad  wmmrwpi  to  the  pmmt  da\f  ?  In  this  way  our  reason,  or 
emnnon  sense,  or  logic  arraDices  the  matter ;  and  in  this  way  only  can 
it  be  raUonally  and  scripturalTy  decided.  With  all  men  of  sense,  the 
controversy  will  hang  on  this  point.    A  iitlure  here  is  luin  to  the 


KOMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


03 


cause.  If  this  point  cannot  be  proved,  it  is  as  useless  to  contest  oth- 
ers, as  it  would  be  to  finish  a  house  that  is  built  upon  the  ice.  Strike 
off  the  head  and  the  body  perishes.     Yet  tliis  capital  point  rests  upon 

an  inference!  ,       «,        ^        -j 

How  would  an  American  like  to  be  told  that  the  office  of  president 
depended  upon  an  inference  1  that  there  was  no  provision  for  it  in  the 
constitution— that  it  was  inferred  from  twenty  clauses,  scattered  here 
and  there  in  as  many  sections?  Could  it  be  possible,  that  the 
greatest  office  in  this  nation— the  very  head  of  this  government,  should 
rest  on  the  construction  of  these  clauses ;  that  there  is  no  chapter  in 
the  constitution,  expressly  creating  the  office  ?  Yet,  this  is  precisely 
the  case  with  the  pope.  The  gentleman  does  not  claim  for  him  a  po- 
sitive grant  in  the  New  Testament.  He  must  acknowledge  that  there 
is  no  such  office  distinctly  asserted— that  it  depends  on  the  reasonings 
of  fallible  men  to  ferret  it  out.  Here  I  must  expose  the  nakedness  of 
the  land  and  sweep  from  the  arena  the  dust  of  Uadition,  which  blinds 
the  eyes  of  implicit  believers. 

It  is  said  by  the  Romanists  that  a  belief  in  the  supremacy  of  the 
pope  is  essential  to  salvation.     Boniface  VIII.  decrees  in  his  canon 

*aw  in  the  words  following: 

"  Moreover  we  declare,  and  say,  and  define,  and  pronounce  to  every  human 
creature,  that  it  is  altogether  necessary  to  sakation  to  be  subject  to  the  Roman 

'^^'it  appears,  if  not  pedantic,  at  least  awkward  to  read  Latin  to  an 
Encrlish  audience.  However,  my  learned  opponent,  so  often  sete  me 
the'example,  that  he  will  allow  me  to  quote  this  important  decree : 

"  Snbesse  Romano  Pontijici  mnnis  hvmanee  creatvroe  declaramui,  dtctmus, 
deAnimus^  et  pronttnciamm  omnino  esse  necessifate  salutis."  .     . 

It  is  then  solemnly  decreed  that  a  belief  in,  and  submission  to,  the 
Roman  pontiff  is  essential  to  salvation.  Ought  not,  then,  his  authority 
to  be  as  clearly  pointed  out  in  the  Bible  as  the  mission  of  Jesus 
Christ?  for  the  person  and  mission  and  sacrifice  of  Christ  are  to  us 
useless,  without  faith  in  the  pope.  Again,  of  what  use  is  the  Bible, 
without  this  belief;  and  especially,  if  so  important  a  matter  is  so  ob- 
scurely expressed  in  it  as  to  rest  upon  a  mere  inference  1  Does  the 
person  and  office  of  Christ  depend  on  a  mere  inference  I  Is  it  not  as- 
serted and  re-asserted,  a  hundred  Umes  by  the  voices  of  all  the  pro- 
phets and  apostles  of  both  Testamente?  In  the  Jewish  economy,  the 
high  Priest  was  on  earth :  but  in  our  economy  he  is  in  Heaven.  There 
was  truth  in  the  type,  and  there  must  be  truth  in  the  anti-type.  1  et 
every  thing  concerning  that  priesthood  was  positively  and  expressly 
ordained.  The  office,  the  officer,  the  succession,  and  the  means  of 
keeping  the  blood  pure.  For,  No  man  dare  *'take  that  office  upon 
himself,  but  he  that  was  called  of  God,  as  was  Aaron."  Aaron  then 
was  distinctly  called  to  be  a  high  priest.  Now  we  argue  Oiat  if  we 
had  a  high  priest  on  earth  under  our  high  Priest  in  heaven,  and  if  salva- 
tion hang  upon  obedience  to  him :  it  ought  to  be  as  clear  as  that  of  Aaron. 
But  in  reference  to  the  Old  Testament  priesthood,  we  find  ^ery 
thing  distinctly  and  unequivocally  stated.  Exodus  xxviu.  1.  "Take 
Aaron  and  his  sons  from  among  the  children  of  Israel,  that  he  and  they 
mav  minister  to  me  in  the  priest's  office."     Again,  xl.  13.  "And  thou 

t   "{.  .'f*.  A J  u:~    •»»«    «ka4'  Via  mov  ministAT  tn  mo  in  the 


M 


liailATB  OH  TH'B 


ItWt  tmd  te  llie  pilieinieiit  history  of  the  Jew«,  as  it  is  in  1  Chron.  33d 
mi  Mth  chiptcTS,  do  W6  ind  the  unequivocal  insiituUon  and  records 

of  ills  priesthood!  .  «  .«j  *^«.««,^ 

Bit  it  is  not  only  in  a  disUnct  and  unequivocal  call  and  consecra- 

lion,  hut  in  the  subsequent  care  evinced  in  sustaining  this  appoint- 

inent,  that  we  see  the  necessity  of  such  »  P^"*^«X /'Pn^wrrT 
mm  and  undeittanding.  The  fehellion  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram, 
■nd  the  destnictlon,  by  a  miraculous  interposition,  of  themselves  and 
of  their  eonipany,  together  with  two  hundred  and  fifty  pnnces  ot  Israel, 
for  seeking  to  invade  the  office,  is  another  solemn  altestaUon  of  the 
divine  erection  of  this  office,  and  the  certain  call  of  Aaron  s  family. 

Acain:  The  appointment  of  God  to  select  an  almond  rod  tor  eacn 
trihe*  and  to  inscnbe  the  name  of  each  of  the  twelve  families  upon 
those  rods,  ewry  tribe's  name  upon  a  scpamle  rod,  and  the  miraculous 
iMddlnff  and  blossoming  and  almond-bearing  of  Aaron  s  rod,  in  the 
eoufse  of  a  sintrle  night,  was  another  settlement  of  this  matter,  so  spe- 
cial, supernatural,  and  divine,  as  to  put  it  to  rest  for  ever.  Here  we 
miiit  to  read  in  full  the  lOth  and  17lh  chapters  of  Numbers;  but  we 
have  only  time  to  refer  to  them.  Thus  by  a  o osiuve  call,  »nd  two 
•plendid  and  awfully  fflorious  miracles,  was  the  office  of  the  high 
pffiesthiiod  established  in  IstmI.  .  ^     .      ^  n « 

And  may  we  not  ask,  that  if  as  Boniface  has  defined,  and  all  Roman 
Catholics  believe, « ikai  there  it  m  mhmUmh  hd  in  the  admiition  of  Me 
Mmm  ten  ^  the  p&pm  if  Momet'  ought  not  the  tnstotuUon  of  a  new 
Older  to  be  as  clearly  pointed  out,  and  sustained  in  the  now  law,  as  it 

was  in  the  old?!  ,     ,        •         .  u    ^.:.:.«  »• 

Bui  my  opponent  has  to  concede  that  there  is  no  such  positive  of 
•ipiww  institution  of  St.  Peter's  chair,  nor  of  his  call  and  consecra- 
tion, nor  any  law  of  succession  whatever  in  the  New  Testament ;  and 
that  It  rests  wholly  upon  inference.  Now,  if  no  man  can  take  this 
honor  upon  himself,  but  he  that  is  called  of  God,  as  vjras  Aaron,  where 
Is  the  office  and  the  anthori^  of  the  popes  of  Rome  !  !  There  is  for  it 
no  such  call.  Or  will  my  Mend  say  that  nnere  inference  or  assump- 
tion is  a  proper  foundation  for  such  a  call  and  office  1 

On  Satorday  evening  I  began  the  examlnaUon  of  the  prroiises  from 
which  is  ifferred  this  high  and  responsible  office;  and  so  for,  1  think, 
proved  that  he  iwinot  even  find  a  good  logiial  inference  for  it.  In 
Ifatthiv  «»i  ws  f<*on^  ^  support  to  the  Idea  that  the  chureh  ot  Jesus 
Chflsl  was  to  be  built  upon  tfii  lleth  and  blood  and  bones  of  Peleri 
Mither  upon  his  pnoa  nor  office.  We  savr  Uiat  every  role  of  ^m- 
man— that  the  construction  of  langmje  forbade  such  a  transition  as 
was  necessary  to  the  hypothesis.  To  have  addressed  Peter  m  the 
•econd  and  third  persons  as  both  present  and  absent,  in  the  wme 
breath,  is  wholly  unprecedented.  To  have  spoken  of  him,  and  to 
him  at  one  time,  in  one  period,  and  on  a  matter  so  cardinal  as  making 
him  the  foundation  of  his  church.  Is  not  to  be  admitted  on  the  autho- 
flty  of  mere  assumption,  without  a  single  case  parallel  in  all  holy  wnl 
to  lay  alongside  of  It.  .       i 

The  case  in  no  rational  point  of  view  will  endure  such  violence. 
Jesua  asked  for  a  cofife$moih  Peter  gave  it.  Tho  conversaUon  turned 
upon  that  confession,  and  not  upon  Peter.  The  comment  ought  to 
iave  been  upon  the  text,  and  not  upon  hiro  that  gave  It.  It  was  upon 
the  loit  and  not  noon  the  preacsher. 


BOXAK   CATHOUC   MELIOION. 


We  Protestants  say  that  the  chureh  is  founded  on  the  thing  con- 
lessed.  Christ  himself  is,  indeed,  the  rock ;  but  figuratively  the  truth 
which  represents  him.  I  was  struck  with  astonishment  when  I  heard 
my  worthy  opponent  say,  that  Peter  was  the  rock,  and  Christ  only  a 
stone  in  this  spiritual  temple ! 

[Bishop  Purcbll  here  explained,  '  that  he  had  said  that  Christ  was 
the  corner  stone  which  was  to  strengthen  and  give  consistency  to  the 
foundation ;  and  Peter  the  rock  which  was  to  strengthen  and  give  con- 
sistency to  the  superstructure.']     Mr.  Campbell  proceeded : 

Christ  the  comer  atone/  and  Peter  the  rock ! !  Does  this  help  the 
matter  l' 

What  says  1  Cor.  iii.  "  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  what 
Is  already  laid," — ^very  Peter ! !  No,  indeed ;  but  Jesus  Christ  him- 
self Is  the  corner  stone,  the  rock,  the  foundation  1  Then  Peter  is  but 
a  itone,  as  his  name  imports.  But  there  were  eleven  other  stones  of 
equal  value :  for,  says  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  church  is  built  upon  the 
foundation  of  the  apostle» — all  the  apostles ;  and  of  the  prophets  too ! 
When,  then,  all  these  stones  are  at  the  foundation,  and  Christ  the  chief 
corner,  where  is  the  room  for  Peter  the  rock  1 

But,  we  have  other  expressions  that  illustrate  Matthew  xvi.  Look- 
ing at  the  temple  one  day,  Jesus  said  to  those  before  him,  **■  Destroy 
thit  temple  and  I  will  build  it  again  in  three  days."  Were  the  per- 
sons he  addressed  in  the  second  person  and  the  temple  the  same  thing  1 
Here,  then,  are  the  persons  addressed,  the  subject  of  convereation,  and 
himself-— you,  (the  addressed,)  and  the  temple,  (himself.)  So  have 
we  Peter,  his  confession,  and  Christ  the  builder  of  the  chureh,  in  the 
passage  before  us.  They  understood  by  his  question  that  he  spoke  of 
his  body;  but  his  body  was  not  himself:  neither  was  the  confession 
of  Peter,  Christ  himself;  nor  Peter's  person,  the  rock  of  ages.  Sorely 
the  papal  rock  is  not  as  our  rock ;  our  enemies  themselves  being  judges. 

But  petroB  and  peira  sound  alike,  and  therefore,  though  of  different 
gender,  case,  and  person,  they  must  be  identical !  Of  the  pereon  and 
case  we  have  said  enough,  (for  my  friend  has  not  attempted  to  refute 
It.)  Of  the  difference  in  gender,  he  will  tell  us,  that  it  was  written  in 
Syriac,  and  that  the  word  signifying  stone  in  that  language  is  of  no 
gender.  This  is  gratuitous.  He  can  produce  no  copy  of  Matthew  in 
Syriac ;  the  only  authentic  copy  we  have  is  that  before  me.  It  is  the 
Greek  version  of  Matthew :  "  5nbtt"  is  in  the  second  person,  and  "Mt«" 
Is  in  the  third.  Petrot  is  masculine  and  Petra  is  feminine.  It  is  impos- 
sible for  language  to  do  more  to  prevent  mistake ;  and  he  that  would 
attempt  to  explain  away  these  thre»— gender,  pereon  and  case,  is  not 
tubject  to  the  laws  of  language,  neither  indeed  can  be. 

It  Is  commonly  observ^  that  Peter  seems  not  to  have  been  any  bet- 
ter qualified  af^r  than  before  the  confession,  to  be  the  foundation  of  the 
church :  for  he  is  reprovt^l  for  his  woridly  notions  of  the  Messiah  and 
his  kingdom,  in  these  words ;  "  Get  thee  behind  me,  advenaryf  for  thou 
lelishest  not  the  things  of  God  ;  but  the  things  of  man."  The  word  «i- 
ianat  signifies  adversary.  Jesus  calls  him  not  ho  safancu,  Satan  ;  hut 
simply  opponent.  Stand  aside  thou  who  opposest  me  in  this  matter  : 
Thou  dost  not  understand  these  divine  things. 

There  i»  another  of  the  bishop's  texts  to  which,  out  of  courtesy,  I 
must  allude:  "Peter,  when  thou  art  converted,  confirm  your  breth- 
The  meaning  of  which  is,— Peter,  as  you  have  experienced  tba 


ren 


IPJ 


DBBATl   on   THE 


bitterness  of  f«f>entaiice,  you  can  hereafter  comfort  and  strengthen  yont 
penitent  hrethren.  My  learned  opponent  interprets  «^jhw«5  Feieu 
when  yoii  are  converted,  ym*  thall  be  my  vicar  mid  prince  if  me  ^poeilm  ! 

John  iii,  "Lowest  thou  tmrnore  than  ihem^^  it  apin  before  us.  The 
bisimp  will  have  iheae  to  refer  to  the  apostles.  My  midieooe  will  re- 
Biiiiber  that  when  I  read  the  Greek  of  the  passage,  he  quoted  Latin 
(iplm  quam  Am,)  as  if  to  correct  the  Greek  by  deciding  that  theu  was 
mmcuHne  and  not  neater,  the  very  point  in  debate»-lhat  when  he  wa« 
challen^  to  sustain  his  Latin  comment  by  the  original,  he  immedi- 
ately af^er  taking  un  the  Greek  Testameiit  laid  it  down. 

It  will  elucidate  this  passage  to  read  the  whole  in  the  original^  Teia« 
13th»  , 

In  reference  to  which  Jesus  says,  ^m  l#r*,  «>*««  /*»  'fMm'nmr, 
The  grammatical  antecedent  to  t^»rm  must  be  Toy  a^or  and  tj 
l^Jmm,  which  makes  it  neuier.  Now,  I  ask,  on  what  grammatical 
aultiority  does  the  Vulgate  convert  these  into  the  masculmel 
Ought  a  translator  to  judge  for  his  readers,  or  ought  he  to  give 
the  same  latitude  of  inquiry  to  his  readers  which  the  original  gives  to 
him.  The  latter,  certainly.  So  decides  the  highest  tribunal  in  the 
commonwealth  of  letters.  And  neither  my  opponent  nor  his  Latin 
nor  Greek  supplements,  nor  interpolations,  have  any  right  to  make  that 
masculine,  which  the  original  makes  at  least  doubtful,  himself  being 
judge :  and  according  to  my  judgment,  on  the  laws  of  language,  cer- 
tainly, neutert 

On  what  precarious,  inferential  and  illogical  grounds  rest  the  proud 
aspirations  of  the  pope  of  Rome  !  He  outrrivals  the  proudest  mon- 
archs  of  the  east.  He  that  styles  himself  "  brother  to  the  sun  and 
moon,"  and  ♦*  disposer  of  Asiatic  crowns,"  is  modest  compared  with 
fhe  vicar,  who  claims  dominion  over  angels  and  saints  in  heaven- 
over  all  the  spirits  in  the  wide  domains  of  purgatory ;  who  styles  him- 
self, or  permits  others  to  address  him  as  a  God  on  earth— as  ••  his  holi- 
ness. Lord  God  the  Pope,"  as  holding  the  keys  of  heaven  and  hell,  and 
the  two  swords  of  ecclesiastic  and  political  justice ;  and  all  this  might? 
empire  resting  upon  the  words,  "|ie<ra,"  ♦*  Urengthen  Iky  brethren^  * 
^*  ibiieiil  ikm  me  more  than  /Aete,"  **/eeil  my  §keep  and  lamba,'^  &c. 
Was  there  ever  so  proud  a  superstructure  reared  upon  so  many  and 
BO  baseless  assumptions  I! 

The  gentleman  quoted  yet  another  verse  from  the  Vulgate ;  1  Pet 
V.  3,  •*  Be  noi  lord§  over  the  dergy^  Hence  he  infers,  the  apostle  Pe- 
ter had  the  dergy  under  him.  But  the  apostle  says,  "  not  as  lords 
over  the  clergy,'^  there  then,  was  a  plurality  of  krder-^oi  one  su- 
preme head  !  Although  this  passage  was  quoted  at  an  early  period 
of  the  discussion,  by  my  opponent,  f  reserved  my  remarks  upon  it  till 
now.  It  reads  in  the  original  and  the  common  version,  **  not  as  lords 
©ter  the  heritage,  lot,  or  people  of  the  Lord."  KAJim,  the  word  here 
translated  elergy,  occurs  twelve  times  in  the  New  Testament,  and  in 
nine  of  these  it  is  translated  Jul.  In  Acts,  xxvi.  18,  and  in  Col.  i.  12, 
it  is  translated  inheritance^  and  in  the  passage  before  us,  it  may  be 
either  A>l,  heritage,  or  inheritance  t  but  elergy  is  most  whimsical  and 
arbitrary.  As  well  might  the  Vul^te  have  said  to  Simon  Magus, 
«•  thou  hast  neither  part  nor  clergy  in  ibis  matter:"  or,  in  Col.  i.  12, 
••  lie  has  itted  ns  to  partake  in  the  clergy  of  the  saints."    In  both 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


97 


cases  the  word  is  the  same  In  the  original.  These  shew  by  what 
a  stretch  of  power  and  arbitrary  dominion  over  words,  these  critics 
would  bring  the  clergy  or  christian  ministry  under  the  bishop  of  Rome. 
8o  fades  from  the  face  of  reason  the  whole  evidence  from  the  Bible,  in 
favor  of  the  grand  office  without  which  the  papacy  is  as  mere  a  fig- 
ment of  fancy  as  the  visions  of  the  prophet  of  Islamism ! 

Having  found  the  office  of  vicar,  or  general  superintendant  of  the 
m'hole  church,  the  universal  episcopate  of  Rome,  without  express  or 

roeitive  precept  or  institution,  and  without  even  inferential  probability; 
proceed  in  the  third  place  to  show  still  farther,  that  it  is  anti-aerip* 
iutal,  not  only  in  theory,  but  in  the  facts  recorded. 

I  have  said  that  the  first  church  was  the  Hebrew.  It  was  catholic 
nnd  apostolic  :  for  all  the  twelve  apostles  were  in  it.  This  cannot 
be  said  of  any  other  society  that  ever  existed.  The  whole  college  of 
the  twelve  apostles  had  their  seat  in  Jerusalem.  The  Samaritan 
daughter  of  Jerusalem  was  the  first  fruits  out  of  Judea.  Philip,  one  of 
the  aroetles*  evangelists,  carried  the  word  of  the  Lord  to  Samaria. 
They  had  believed,  repented,  and  been  baptised.  News  is  brought  to  Je- 
rusalem. The  cardinals  all  meet. — ^The  twelve  apostles  are  in  session. 
But  where  is  Peier^s  chair  1  The  prince  of  the  apostles,  the  vicar  of 
Christ,  had  not  yet  learned  his  duty,  and  his  brethren  had  not  yet 
learned  to  call  him  pope.  The  fact  is,  they  made  a  legate  of  him. 
They  sent  two  legates  to  Jerusalem.  And  who  do  you  think  were  the 
two  first  apostolic  legites  1  They,  indeed  sent  pope  Peter  and  his  broth- 
er John  !!  Thus  it  is  clear  that  the  notion  of  Petf;r*s  universal  episco- 
pacy, and  princeship  of  the  apostles  was  not  yet  conceived.  This  fact 
speaks  a  volume  against  the  pretended  successors  of  Peter. 

But—again,  and  still  more  humiliating  to  his  successors,  when  Peter 
had  introduced  the  Gentiles  into  the  church,  the  brethren  of  the  circum- 
cision rose  up  en  maaee  against  him,  not  regarding  him  as  having  the 
least  supreme  authority  in  the  case.  **  How,"  do  you  ask,  "did  Peter 
receive  the  complaints  from  all  quarters  for  his  daring  to  innovate,  by 
mere  authority  on  all  the  holy  brethren  ?  Did  he  say,  I  am  Christ^s 
vicar— ohief  of  the  apostle8,-^the  supreme  head  of  the  church — I  hold 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  and  do  you  demand  of  me,  why  / 
should  act  thus"  ?!  Never  thus,  spoke  Peter.  He  did  not  assume  any 
thing :  but  tells  the  matter  over,  and  shows  how  God  had  opened  the 
door  of  iaith  to  the  Gentiles ;  "  and  what  was  I,"  he  reasons,  "  that  I 
should  withstand  God  V  Ought  I  to  have  stood  up  and  said  to  the 
Gentiles,  you  shall  not  enter  the  kingdom  of  ^e  Messiah,  nor  be  en- 
rolled amongst  the  children  of  God?- In  the  llth  chapter  of  the  Acte 
of  the  apostles,  we  have  a  full  exposition  of  the  groundless  pietension 
of  his  successors,  in  the  details  of  this  case  from  the  lips  of  the  apos- 
tle himself.  A  third  instance  of  the  entire  absence  of  all  such  vicaro 
in  the  primitive  church,  appears  in  the  "  council  held  at  Jerusalem.** 
So  the  bishop's  party  designate  it,  and  for  the  sake  of  argument,  let  it 
be  a  eouneil. 

It  was  not  called  by  Peter  the  pope,  nor  was  it  a  council  of  the 
whole  worid ;  but  of  two  or  three  churches.  Well,  they  met.  Who 
was  president  1  Neither  the  pope  nor  his  legates.  Peter  is  not  in  the 
chair;  hut  on  the  floor.  He  spoke  first,  as  he  was  always  accustomed 
to  do:  but  did  he  dictate  the  course  to  be  pursued  ?  No.  Had  he  the 
honor  of  drafUng  or  submitting  the  decrees  !  He  had  not.  He  arose 
I  T 


US 


DSBATK  OSf  THB 


and  ipoke  to  the  asasmlilyt  and  told  what  God  had  done  hy  him  among 
the  Cientilea.  Paul  and  Bamahas,  also  on  the  floor,  then  stated  what 
thi  Lord  had  done  by  them  among  the  Gentiles,  and  when  they  had 
doMf  James  arose  to  present  his  views,  **ify  ienlenee  ti'*  aays  he» 
**  that  we  ought  to  write  so  and  so  to  the  Gentiles."  In  his  views  they 
all  acquiesced.  They  do  not  say  in  this  letter,  ^it  seemed  good  to 
Peter !"  No,  "  it  seemed  good  to  ut."  Indeed,  if  any  was  pope  in 
this  assembly,  it  was  James :  not  Peier.  All  the  popes  of  Home  as 
■neeMSOia  of  Peter,  are  therefore  not  only  nnseriptniral ;  hut  anti-acrip- 

'tiiial* 

Again,  and  stronger  still.  In  Gal.  Ist  chap,  we  are  told  of  a  cer- 
tain  controversy  between  Paul  and  Peter, — not  about  faith,  nor  moral- 
ity; but  about  expediency.  Paul  never  would  have  related  this  mat- 
teir :  but  in  self-defence.  There  were  some  in  Gaiatia  that  regarded 
hliii  as  a  sub-apostle,  not  equal  to  those  who  had  been  companions  ot 
the  Lord  duriag  his  publie  ministry.  In  self-defence,  he  affirms  that, 
in  eonveiaations  with  thepilian^  as  some  called  Peter  and  James  and 
loha— 4hree  of  the  oldest  apostles— he  did  not  receive  a  new  idea.  So 
lai  from  being  dependant  on  Peter,  or  inferior  to  him,  he  was  the  only 
apottle  ii  those  days  with  whom  Paul  had  the  slightest  dissension  : 
••for,"  says  he,  "after  Peter  came  down  to  Aniioeh  I  withstood  him  to 
the  hmffor  he  was  to  be  blamed  t  for  before  certain  persons  came  from 
lanea,  he  did  eat  with  the  Gentiles ;  but  when  they  were  come,  he 
withdrew  and  separated  from  them,  fearing  the  Jews.  And  the  other 
Jews  dissembled  likewise  with  him,  insomuch  that  Barnabas  was  car- 
iwd  away  with  their  dissimulation.  Seeing  that  they  walked  not  up- 
ti||htly,  I  Hid  to  Peter  in  the  presence  of  them  all ;  "  Why  do  you  com- 

ES  the  Gentiles  to  live  as  do  the  Jews  1"  Thus  Paul  reproved  the 
ead  of  the  church,  his  father,  pope  Peter,  in  the  presence  of  all  the 
brethren  for  a  sort  of  temporizing  expediency  in  its  practical  details, 
squinting  at  dissimulation.  AH  these  facts  show  how  contrary  to  the 
doctrine  and  facts  of  the  sacred  writings  are  the  assumptions  of 
popeiy. 

A  word  or  two  from  the  last  will  and  testament  of  the  afiostle  Peter. 
Beiiif  Iwr  advanced  in  years  he  writes  two  letters  containinpr  his  last 
wMm  to  the  brethren,  in  the  first  he  associates  himself  with  the  el 
dtfs  of  the  Jewish  church,  and  claims  no  other  eminence  than  that  of 
feliow  elder,  and  as  such  exhorts  them  to  feed  the  flock  of  God  wil- 
liagly.  In  the  second  letter,  be  wills,  that  the  brethren  addressed, 
•* should,  ailsr  his  decease,  be  mindful  of  the  commandment  of  to,  the 
motHa  of  the  Lord  and  Savior."  Thus,  with  his  last  words,  he  dis- 
elsiins  every  attribute  of  official  supremacy.  He  is  known  only  in  the 
Nsw  Teslsinent,  as  an  apottk^  either  from  his  own  words  simply,  or 
iiMe  of  Paul,  or  from  aov  other  circumstance,  which  in  the  history  c( 
tlie  church  is  recorded  irom  Peoteeost  to  the  end  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. I  shall  leave  other  sciii^wpes  for  the  calls  of  my  opponent,  and 
ihe'OisoaiioD. 

I  aoWffooeed  to  show  that  as  there  is  no'  foundation  in  scripture, 
so  there  is  none  in  fact,  nor  in  reason,  for  the  papal  supremacy.  I 
have  shown,  that  it  wants  pomHve  proof-- that  it  is  built  on  inference— 
that  this  inference  is  not  found  in  the  premises— and  that  other  scrip- 
tiiil  facts  and  documents  preclude  the  possibilitjr  of  such  an  inference. 

We  have.cmphalioally  stated,  that  the  first  point  is  to  establish  tlit 


BOMAN   CATHOUC    BKLI6I0N. 


W 


off  ee.  If  there  is  do  office,  there  can  be  no  officer.  But  my  friend  the 
bishop's  system  is  still  more  at  fault,  for  if  he  could  prove  (what  he 
never  will)  that  there  was  such  an  office ;  still  he  has  to  prove  that 
Peter  was  the  first  officer. — ^That  Peter  was  that  officer  is  as  cardinal 
a  point  to  his  system,  as  that  the  papal  office  had  been  set  up  by  Jesus 
Christ.  The  Scriptures  are  perfectly  mute  on  that  point !  What  says 
church  history  1  It  is  only  inferred  that  Peter  ever  wa$  in  Rome!  It 
is  only  probable,  Barronius  only  says  it  is  probable  he  had  a  see 
there :  he  does  not  moot  that  question.  There  is  not  a  single  word  in 
all  antiquity  which  positively  asserts  that  Peter  was  ever  bishop  o/Bome^ 
mr  was  ever  in  Borne,  The  ^ntleman  quoted  Irenaeus.  Can  he  quote 
the  original  ?  I  affirm  that  it  does  not  exist :  and  even  the  copy  from 
which  he  read  was  not  found  for  centuries  after  Irenaeus  wrote.  But 
admit  it  to  be  genuine.  I  affirm  that  Iren^us  no  where  asserts^,  that  Pe» 
ier  was  bishop  of  Nome.  If  neither  he  nor  his  contemporaries  assert  it, 
what  is  the  authority  of  Grotius,  or  Casaubon,  or  Usher  or  such  mod- 
em authors  1 !  It  proves  nothing.  The  assertion  of  my  present  opponent 
is  worth  as  much  as  that  of  any  man  who  has  lived  for  a  thousand  years, 
to  prove  an  event  which  happened  a  thousand  years  before  he  was 
bom. 

The  bishop  and  his  friend  the  editor  of  the  Catholic  paper  and  at 
least  fifteen  hundred  citizens  heard  me  lecture  when  last  in  the  city ; 
and  yet,  so  faithless  is  tradition,  that  I  have  seen  it  stated  in  a  print 
of  this  city— in  a  Roman  Catholic  Telegraph,  too,  that  I  had  asserted 
as  a  proposition  to  be  proved,  "  that  Charles  Carroll,  (f  Carrollton  was 
not  a  Roman  CathoUe .'" — words  that  never  fell  from  my  lips  or  pen. 
If  then  tradition  cannot  be  kept  here  for  a  single  week,  in  this  day  of 
light  and  knowled^,  and  good  faith,  how  can  you  respect  and  believe 

traditions  descending  through  ages  of  darkness  and  superstition  1 

why  bring  up  men  ^om  the  remote  corners  of  the  earth,  who  lived 
more  than  a  century  afler  the  time  in  question,  to  tell  us  their  hearsays 
or  the  rumors  of  past  ages. 

I  have  affirmed,  that  there  is  no  document  to  prove  that  Peter  was 
ever  bishop  of  Rome.  My  friend  disputes  this  point ;  we  are  then  at 
issue,  and  this  is  a  vital  point  Let  him  then  meet  me  upon  it,  and 
decide  the  controversy.  Ireneus  says  not,  that  either  Peter  or  Paul 
was  bishop  of  Rome;  but,  **over  that  church  that  was  planted  by  Peter 
aod  Paul  sat  Lbus.'^  True,  the  inference  is,  that  Peter  and  Paul  must 
have  been  at  Rome;  if  not,  how  believe  that  the  church  was  planted 
by  them!  But  the  church  at  Rome  never  was  planted  by  than.  The 
faith  of  the  Romans  was  known  through  all  the  earth  when  Paul  wrote 
his  letter  to  them,  and  at  that  time  he  had  never  been  in  that  city.  The 
proposition  is  therefore  not  true;  and  Iren»us,  if  he  wrote  so,  wrote 
on  erroneous  tradition,  and  is  not  worthy  of  credit.  Admit,  for  argu- 
ment sake,  that  we  take  the  testimony  of  the  fathers  on  the  succession, 
which  are  we  to  believe  1  They  tell  us  stories  irreconcilably  dif^ 
lerent.  The  gentleman  triumphantly  held  up  a  map,  as  if  there  were 
some  hidden  virtue  in  it,  and  said  he  could  speak  upon  it  till  dooms- 
day. I  have  also  a  map  here,  which  will  prove  that  his  map  can 
firove  nothing  without  a  tongue  in  it ;  and  if  holding  up  this  map  be- 
ore  you  couU  convince  you,  I  should  soon  carry  the  point.  Bellar- 
mine  admits,  that  the  fathers  contradict  each  other  on  the  succession  of 
the  first  popes.  A  phalanx  of  authors  can  be  adduced  to  prove  that  the 


100 


IIBBATB  ON  THE 


:« 


Mkmm  aie  not  inuutefNU  upon  tny  one  poinl  of  importance,  on  tli&l 
Of  raj  odier  dotna  of'  'the  piipeej. 

BMne  aothonty  cannot  eiitt,  but  in  the  holy  oracles :  against  any 
other  pietended  infallible  standard,  all  men  should  protest.  The 
Ihtheii  agroed  in  bearing  testimony  to  the  scriptures,  as  far  as  they 
Imilvidiially  knew  them ;  bot  their  unanimooe  consent  on  any  thing 
else  has  not  yet  been  found. 

Justin  Martyr,  for  example,  proves  my  interpretation  of  the  16th 
ch.  Matthew,  on  the  rocft.  He  is  one  of  the  primitive  fathers.  He 
gifM  substantially  the  same  Tiews  of  that  whole  passage  as  I 
mm  addoced  here.  Now  it  is  impossible  for  my  opponent  to  find  a 
unanimous  consent  of  the  fathers  with  him,  as  I  have  Justin  Martyr, 
of  the  second  century,  and  many  others,  with  me.  My  standing  argu- 
ment, on  the  consent  of  the  fathers,  is  this : 

I^md  wmmjf  ef  ike  faiherM  tmequivoeaily  agreeing  with  me.  7%e»e^ 
^mmm,  mud  exprem  lie  mnammom  eomeni,  if  there  be  any  { for  it  ear^ 
mihwmmmmuwilkmatkem.  Nam,  f  there  be  m  mmmmom  emueni, 
mBommimhdMupmafaimfmmiaUonf  and  if  then  be,  they  bmM 
m  a  fake  /bmiJMiii ,  for  we  hme  thai  eoment,  not  they. 

But  this  unanimous  consent  fails  in  the  succession.  Admittinff  thai 
Pijsf  was  first  bishop  of  Rome,  no  living  man  can  tell  whether  Linut 
or  ClflBMil  was  the  second  bishop  of  Rome.  The  ancients  do  nol 
agree  upon  that  point.  Tertullian  makes  Clement  second  bishop,  and 
others  make  Linns.  I  have  a  chart,  in  Eusebius,  which  differs  from 
his  own  historr  in  various  points.  I  have  other  charts  and  indexes 
that  nlace  the  bishops  of  Rome  in  a  different  order.  Eusebius  does 
not  place  Peter  first ;  nor  do  any  of  the  fathers.  He  places  Linus  first, 
then  Clitiis,  then  Clement.  Another  tells  us,  that  Peter  was  first,  then 
Umm,  then  Clenient.  A  fourth,  perhaps,  on  the  authority  of  the  last, 
f laiMt  fMar  HisI  and  Clement  8econd.^[Time  expired.] 

Half  pad  10  o'clock,  J.  M. 


BlSiM»  PI7BCBLL 

It  it  v«ll,  beloved  Iriends,  to  keep  our  eyes  upon  the  polar  star, 
whan  mm  we  have  embarked  upon  the  sea  of  controversy.  The 
polar  star  of  this  question,  is  the  attempted  disproof,  by  my  learned 
ilMid,  of  the  Roman  Catholic  claim,  to  be  the  holy,  apostolic,  catholic 
church.  He  was  pledged  to  show  her  to  be  an  apostacy  from  the  only 
true  church.  Has  he  proved  this!  Is  there  one  intelligent  man  in 
™  »■•«»%  propwred  to  answer  this  question  in  the  afllrmative? 
I  aakwl,  firom  what  church  was  she  an  apostaey  I  He  told  us  that  she 
had  apostatised  in  the  year  1054.  But  he  has  not  yet  told  us  what 
f'f^yy  *JJ  **»«  one  tra«  holy  and  apostolic  church  from  which  she 
■teaded.  There  was  a  good  rsasoo  for  it:  ao  other  catholic  church 
•lirtsd^at  the  epoch  Indleated,  but  ours,  the  Roman  Catholic.  We 
wws  ti^  taken  to  the  year  260,  or  some  time  thereabout.  These 
were  indefinite  words ;  and  I  ask  again  what  and  where  was  the  true 
church  firom  which  she  apoatatiied  in  260  !  Has  he  informed  you  I 
we  were  referred  to  the  Novatiaia— and  a  Protestant  church  historiaii 
Moaheim,  tells  us«» 

Pir.  Camfsiu.  heienslled  Bishop  Piticell  to  order  as  not  speakinw 
^JTIT^        moderatora  decided  that  he  was  in  order  and  he  pr<> 
^  .]  The  gentleman  cannot  oonliise  me  b^  these  interruptioui. 


SOMAN   CATHOUC    RELIGION. 


101 


My  eje  is  on  the  star.  I  say,  that  Mosheim,  a  Protestant  eedesiasti. 
eal  historian  tells  us  that  the  Novatians  embraced  essential  errors.  1 
have  quoted  from  that  historian,  for  this  sect  and  all  other  prominent 
sects,  to  the  beginning  of  the  16th  century.  They  taught  some  doc- 
trines  which  Catholics,  and  some,  which  Protestants  hold.  They 
taught  some  errors  which  Catholics  and  Protestants  agree  to  reject— 
they  taught  disorganizing  doctrines,  which  armed  3ie  civil  power 
both  Catholic  and  Protestant  against  them — and  these  doctrines,  Ca- 
tholics and  Protestants  mutually  abhor.  They  were  not  then  united, 
pure,  or  apostolic.  They  were  not  the  church  of  Christ.  The  ques- 
tion then  reverts  noon  us — which  was  the  church  of  Christ,  from 
which  the  Roman  Cfatholic  church  separated  in  the  3d  century  1 

I  now  come  at  once  to  the  last  speech  of  the  gentleman. ^I  have 

already  agreed  that  this  controversy  is  resolvible  into  two  or  three 
^nd  principles — and  by  the  discussion  of  these  we  may  succeed 
m  ascertaininff  their  ulterior  consequences.  If  true  that  Christ  has 
established  a  head  of  the  Church  on  earth,  it  follows  that  we  must 
recognize  that  head.  So  far  we  are  right.  If  Peter  was  made  that 
head,  we  are  ri^ht  If  Peter  was  to  have  successors,  we  are  right. 
If  that  succession  was  to  last  to  the  end  of  time,  we  are  right,  for 
we  hold  these  propositions  to  be  irrefragable.  If  on  the  contrary, 
these  propositions  could  be  satisfactorily  proved  to  be  untrue,  the 
Catholics  would  be  wrong. 

,  I  have  proved  the  first  of  these,  viz.  that  Peter  was  made  the  head 
of  the  church,  by  Christ,  from  scripture.  And  what  has  my  friend 
discovered  to  weaken  the  force  of  the  numerous  and  strong  texts  1 
have  adduced,— the  rock,  the  keys,  the  feeding  of  the  lambs,  and  ot 
the  sheep  whom  the  lambs  are  wont  to  follow,  the  prayer  of  Christ 
that  P^ter*s  feith  should  never  fail,  the  charge  given  him  by  Christ 
to  confirm  his  brethren,  his  confession  of  the  divinity  of  Christ  be- 
fore the  other  apostles,  and  the  Blessedness  pronounced  on  him  for 
that  confession  by  Christ,  the  deference  shewn  him — ^the  poor  illiterate 
fisherman,  by  Paul,  imbued  with  the  sublimest  lessons  of  the  Law  at 
the  feet  of  Gamaliel,  &c.  &c.?  Why  he  says :  "  Peter,  lovest  thou  me 
more  than  these  fish  V* 

My  friends,  I  know  not  how  to  treat  this  interpretation  seriously. 
But  since  the  gentleman  is  so  curious  an  interpreter,  let  us  see  if  the 
text  will  bear  him  out.  After  the  miracle  of  the  draught  of  fishes, 
the  apostles,  at  Christ^s  invitation,  proceeded  to  some  distance  from 
their  nets  and  barks,  for  the  purpose  of  dining.  It  is  natural  to  sup- 
pose they  selected,  for  dinner,  no  more  of  the  fish  they  had  taken, 
than  they  would  probably  eat  Can  my  friend  say  that  after  they  had 
dined  there  were  any  of  the  cooked  fish  remaining  1  There  might  have 
been  some  bones  left  on  the  table ;  but  would  Christ  point  to  thesn 
fish  bones,  and  say,  Peter,  lovest  thou  more  than  th^?  What  a  ques- 
tion for  Christ  to  ask  his  leading  disciple !  Surely  such  an  inters 
pretalion  is  absurd.  But  what  is  the  voice  of  antiquity  1  My  friend 
says  that  Justin  bears  him  out  in  his  interpretation.  Will  my  friend 
point  out  the  passage  in  that  father's  works  f  Will  he  say  that  it  is  the 
principal  sense,  the  sense  that  father  approves  t  I  pledge  myself  he  will 
not  pretend  to  do  so  while  refutation  is  near.  Now  if  scripture  is  so 
very  clear,  and  this  meaning  as  obvious  as  Mr.  C.  supposes,  is  it 
not  strange  that  this  light  should  beam  upon  us  to  day  for  the  first 
I  3 


ilHiiiJ 

P 


|i 


102 


DEBATS  ON   THB 


Hme!   Hie  gentleiiiaii  chuget  me  witli  IiaTiiif  dared  u  change  t1i« 

fender  of  the  word  ■ignifving  lA«te,  from  neuter  to  masculine.  Does 
e  not  know  that  the  word  rouran  is  both  masculine  and  neuter?  It  is 
generally  applied  to  persons,  though  I  do  not  deny  that  it  may  be  ap« 
|ilied  to  things.  The  Greek  therefore  leaves  us  as  much  in  the  dark 
as  erer* 

We  ind  a  prallel  passage  in  the  new  Testament.  **  He  that  loTeth 
Htlier  and  mother  more  than  me  is  not  worthy  of  me.*'  Matth.  z.  37. 
Heie  Hie  words  are  i^  vf  (more  than  me).  %ui  is  in  the  accusative 
case— 'miraw  is  in  the  genitive  case.  But,  my  friends,  this  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  question  at  issue ;  it  does  not  make  for  or  against  my 
argument,  whether  we  adopt  the  natural,  or  the  gross  inteq>retation« 
Christ  said  to  Peter,  "  loveU  IAiki  me."  He  demands  an  assurance  of 
his  faithful  attachment  Peter  three  times  replies  in  the  affirmative, 
and  thrice  the  command  is  repeated  to  him,  **  feed  my  lambs,**  "  feHi 
my  sheep.**  The  argument  is  entirely  independent  of  either  eon- 
stmetion  referred  to.  Hence  I  maintain  that  Peter  was  establishedy 
head  of  the  church  by  Jesus  Christ.  The  **  rock,"  the  ^  keys,*'  the 
fiiyer,  the  prophecy  of  the  place  and  manner  of  Peter*s  death,  which 
we  reail  in  the  same  chapter,  all  prove  it. 

The  gentleman  says  that  a  doctrine  should  be  se  clear,  that  it  could 
lel  possibly  be  contested.  This  is  really  too  soft  for  a  man  of  Mr. 
C.*8  strong  mind.  What  is  there  so  clear  that  it  eoiM  noi  pcmblu  be 
emiikded.  Does  not  the  universe  tell  as  elearly  as  Grenesis,  that  God 
oeated  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and  is  not  that  contested  T  What 
doctrine  more  clearly  revealed  in  the  bible,  or  more  important  than 
the  divinity  of  Christ!  and  is  not  that  contested  1  and  by  one  of  tlie 
most  learned  societies  of  christians  in  the  United  States,  I  mean  the 
IJmitarians.  They  read  the  bible  and  they  think  it  impiety  and  bias 
fhemy  to  call  Jesus  Christ  God ! 

It  was  essential  In  the  Jewish  institution  that  there  should  be  a  hiffh 
priest.  If  the  old  institution  was  a  type  of  the  new,  where  is  the 
anti-type !  And  if  the  headshin  of  the  high  priest  of  the  Jews  dero- 
gated not  from  the  authority  or  God  the  Father,  who  was  pleased  to 
be  their  special  ruler,  neither  does  the  headship  of  the  pope  derogate 
imn  the  supreme  authority  of  Crod  the  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  who  acouii^ 
•d  the  ehnieh  by  his  blood  and  established  Peter  its  visible  head  on 
earth,  to  exercise  the  office  during  his  natural  life,  and  by  his  succes* 
aers  for  ever. 

Mj  liriend  flies  from  scripture  to  tradition,  and  from  a  lather  of  the 
early  age  to  a  modem  historian.  I  will  pledge  myself  to  this  en- 
lightened assembly  that  the  supremacv  of  Peter  and  of  Peter*s  suc- 
cessors in  the  Roman  see  can  be  abundantly  attested  by  an  appeal  to 
tradition :  and  I  may  here  observe  that  Baronius  has  been  misrepre- 
sented. He  does  not  say  it  is  not  improbable  that  Peter  fixed  his  see  at 
Rome — of  this  he  knew  there  was  no  doubt ;  but  that  it  was  not  im- 
probable he  fixed  his  see  there  bv  the  express  command  of  Christ, 
wMeh  is,  the  intelligent  hearer  will  perceive,  quite  a  different  propo- 
sition, Peter  acted  as  the  other  apostles  did,  under  the  guidance  of  in- 
nffaHon,  in  the  choice  of  the  scene  of  his  pastoral  toils;  but  Baronius 
thinks  it  not  improbable  that  Christ  expremly  commanded  him  to  se* 
leet  Rome  for  his — ^There  he  could  "  teach  all  nations.**  Mr.  C. 
asserts  that  foi  a  thousand  years  there  is  not  a  voice  hean!  to  attest 


ROMAN   CATHOMC    SEUOION. 


103 


this  fact  My  friends,  not  one  voice,  but  five  hundred  attest  it.  There 
is  one  loud  chorus  of  testimony  amonor  the  fathers  and  historians, 
ffivintr  almost  universal  consent  to  the  doctrine.  Some  obscure  indi- 
viduals may  have  doubted,  or  denied  it  in  late  years.  They  are  but 
motes  on  the  surface  of  the  overwhelming  stream  of  testimony.  Agam 
my  friend  went  back  to  the  bible.  He  read  of  the  high  priesV— but  he 
cannot  open  the  bible  without  seeing  his  own  refutation  wntten  there— 
almost  the  first  words  that  struck  my  ears  were,  the  dresses  and  anoint' 
ing  of  the  priests.  Where  are  such  things  done  among  Protestants! 
Do  they  not  make  void  the  scriptures  1  Anointing  the  clergy  and  the 
sick,— commanded  by  the  bible— rejected  by  Protestants— superseded 
by  the  fashions  of  the  day !  Again ;  Aaron  was  separated  that  he  should 
bless  and  sanctify— and  yet  if  the  pope  bless  or  sanctify,  he  is  an  im- 
pious assumer  ot  what  belongs  to  God  alone !!  ,      ^   , 

The  case  of  Korah,  Dalhan  and  Abiram  was  mentioned.  God  re- 
ally appears  to  me  to  extort  from  the  adversaries  of  his  church  the 
most  striking  proof  of  her  authority,  vindicated  in  the  Type,  from 
the  sacrilegious  contradictions  of  the  schismatics  of  the  old  law. 
The  ground  opened  and  swallowed  them  up !  So  have  all  the  sects, 
that  in  the  early  ages  opposed  the  church,  perished.  The  grave  has 
hidden  their  guilt  from  the  earth,  too  happy  if  they  bear  not  its  pen- 
alty in  the  worid  that  expands- beyond  the  grave !  Again  250pnesls 
perished  for  opposing  the  ordinance  of  God  I  the  ecclesiastical  guide 

he  had  appointed !  «  ,  , . 

My  friend  asks,  if  the  headship  of  Peter  and  his  successors  were 
as  certainly  divine  as  the  high  priesthood  of  the  old  law,  would  it  not 
have  been  established  by  proof  as  plain  1     Why,  he  emphatically  de- 
manded, cannot  the  Roman  pontiff,  like  Aaron,  shew  his  authority  by 
an  equally  convincing  miracle  I     My  friends,  I  take  the  gentleman  at 
his  word.  He  that  has  eyes  to  see  let  him  see.  Has  not  God  wrought 
a  similar  miracle— I  will  feariessly  sav- a  far  more  splendid  miracle, 
to  attest  the  preeminence  of  the  see  of  Peter  1     Has  not  the  night  of 
Mahommedanism  and  infidelity  thrown  its  sable  pall  oyer  the  once 
flourishing  churches  of  Africa  and  Asia  1     Has  not  the  bright  "ght  of 
the  irospel  become  extinct  in  the  most  celebrated  of  the  sees  founded 
by  the  other  apostles— Crete,  Corinth,  Ephesus,Antioch,  Alexandria, 
Philippi,  Jerusalem  1     Where  is  the  hymn  of  praise  to  Chnst  inton- 
cd,  the  voice  of  pure  confession  heard,  the  tabernacle  or  the  tes- 
timony seen  in  any  of  these  famous  churches,  where  Su  Paur  had 
formed  such  a  multitude  of  adorers  in  spirit  and  in  truth  t  which  he 
visited  with  so  much  solicitude,  prayed  for  with  so  much  fervor,  and 
loved  with  so  much  tenderness.    Returning  to  visit  these  churches, 
not  on  the  following  day  as  Moses  did  the  rods  of  the  twelve  tnbes 
but  after  eighteen  hundred  years,  we  see  that  the  rod  of  Aaron,  th 
church  formed  by  the  high  priest  appointed  by  Jesus  Chnst  in  th 
New  Law,  has  budded  and  blossomed,  and  produced  fruit  of  which 
all  the  nations  have  participated,  while  the  churches  formed  by  the 
other  aposties  have  been  stricken  with  a  melancholy  stenlity,  and 
have  utterly  withered !    The  murmuring  of  the  children  of  Israel 
airainst  Moses  and  Aaron  ceased  when  they  beheld  the  prodigy  rela- 
t^  in  the  book  of  Numbers ;  is  it  too  much  to  expect  that  we  will  be 
less  insensible  to  an  equally  authentic  declaration  m  favor  of  the 
church  and  pontiff,  the  special  objects  of  the  divine  protection  and 
caret 


i 


ti 

tit  J 
P 

c 

i 


104 


niBATS  ON  TUB 


.V 


I 


1 
\i>. 


1/ 


When  Pioi,  VI.  died  at  Valence,  in  France,  it  was  said  thai  quid 
liine  was  thrown  on  his  corpse,  that  no  Testige  of  it  might  remain,  and 
infidelity  hoasted  that  Christianity  was  buried  in  the  same  grave  with 
its  pontiff.  But  a  successor  was  soon  heheld  to  ascend  into  the  chair 
of  Peter— alas !  he  too,  is  doomed  to  soffer  contumely  for  the  name  of 
Jesns.    He  is  seised  with  violence,  hy  a  ruthless  soldiery,  and  car- 


f 


riei  dr  from  Rome,  an  exile  and  a  prisoner,  to  Fontainebleao.  The 
doom  of  his  persecutor  is  written  :  ne  is  precipitated  from  the  giddy 
lieifbit  of  his  ambition,  and  the  meek,  but  invincible  heir  of  Peter's 
•aond  |iow«r,  contrary  to  all  human  foresight,  is  reinstated  by  a  Pro- 
testant ffoteniment,  by  30,000  Protestant  bayonets,  in  the  peaceful  ex- 
ercise of  hb  duties,  as  the  chief  pastor  of  the  Catholic  world.  Eng- 
land, with  all  thy  faults  I  love  thee  still.  You  are  Protestants,  but 
you  can  be  just*  Rome,  changeless  amid  change,  Rome,  free  among 
the  dead,  unaffected  by  earthly  revolutions,  by  earthly  conquests  un- 
■ulldued,  why  have  tbn  nations  raged,  and  the  f>eop)e  devised  vain 
things  against  thee  !  The  Lord  is  thy  protector  still.  He  hath  won- 
derfully sustained  thee,  amidst  all  the  vicissitudes  of  human  institu- 
tions. "He  that  dweUeth  in  heaven,"  to  use  the  language  of  the 
Psalmist,  "  hath  laughed  at  them  that  stood  up  against  thee,  and  the 
Lord  ihall  deride  them.*'  Mv  friend  would  call  it  *" morbid'^  in  England, 
toniiipatliise  with  the  Catholics,  as  he  has  called  your  generous  Bjm 
f&mm  for  your  persecuted  fellow-citizens  ;  but  it  is  not  morbid,  it  is 
magnanimous,  it  is  just  to  confess  an  error,  to  abjure  an  unfounded 
pmudiM,  and  to  side  with  the  wrongfully  oppressed. 

I  quoted  scripture  to  prove  that  Christ  was  the  corner  stone,  on 
which  the  whole  building  securely  rests — and  that  Peter  is  the  rode  of 
the  foundation,  deriving  whatever  strength  it  has  thus  exhibited  from 
Christ.  Thtre  is  no  contradiction  in  this.  I  am  compelled  to  follow  the 
zigxag  eonrse  of  my  friend.  The  reader  of  the  printed  controversy  will 
he  at  no  loss  to  bring  together  the  diverging  rays  of  evidence  and  to  find 
myanswers  to  objections,  where  they  may  be,  apparently  out  of  place. 

There  is  no  distinction  of  persons  in  Syriac.  In  Greek  it  is  once 
mfrfHt  and  again  ^nn^ — but  this  change  of  gender  is  merely  to 
avoid  a  repetition  of  the  same  word  in  the  same  sentence.  This  is 
reason  sufficient,  to  account  for  the  difference.  I  give  my  friend  thanks 
for  proving  that  Peter  was  not  Satan.  It  is  the  correct  reading:,  and 
therefore,  1  agree  with  his  interpretation  of  the  text;  when  Christ  says 
to  Pelifft  **  get  thee  behind  me  Satan,*'  that  is  you,  who  differ  from 
me  on  this  particular  subject.    This  text  has  been  much  abused. 

Again :  Peter  did  think,  that  he  loved  Jesus  more  than  the  rest,  and 
Chrtst  knew  that  he  did.  Do  you  remember,  my  friends,  the  scene 
which  took  place  shortly  before  the  Savior  suffered  I  When  he  told  his 
apoades,  with  a  holy  melancholy  on  his  sacred  heart,  that  one  of  them 
would  betray  him — that  the  shepherd  should  be  stricken,  and  the  sheep 
4it|i0iied  !  Ah !  is  there  not  something  in  the  noble  hearted  enthusi* 
asm  of  Peter,  which  is  at  once  the  cause  of  his  offence  and  its  pallia- 
tion 1  **'  Although  all  shall  be  scandalized  in  thee,  yet  not  I."  This 
piiyves  an  impulsiveness,  an  ardor,  and  a  strength  of  attachment  to  the 
person  of  Christ,  which  Peter,  too  confidently  it  may  be,  but  yet  sin- 
cerely, believed  to  be  greater  than  the  other  disciples  felt  for  their  di- 
mm  iiiMler. 

leans  knew  this,  hut  he  warns  him  not  to  be  presumptuoos.  **  Amen, 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    KELIGION. 


1C5 


I  5ay  to  thee,  to-day,  even  in  this  night,  before  the  cock  crow  twice, 
thou  shall  deny  me  thrice,"  Mark  xiv.  30.  From  this,  and  other  texts, 
Peter's  ardor,  and  the  Savior's  knowledge  of  his  confidence  in  his  own 
Steadfastness  are  perfectly  plain.     Why,  then,  deny  them  both  1 

I  quoted  the  vulgate,  not  through  ignorance  of  Greek,  on  which  I 
have  shewn  as  much  knowledge  as  my  friend ;  but  not  to  boast  of  a 
little  learning  on  the  wordSf  nx^r  t«/7»».  The  Greek,  the  Latin,  and  tho 
English,  as  verbal  criticism  is  necessarjf  to  elucidate  the  meaning  of 
the  text,  are  by  a  singular  coincidence,  in  this  case,  equally  ambigu- 
ous.   How  can  an  unlettered  Protestant  understand  the  text! 

The  popes  do  not  claim  to  be  lords,  spiritual,  and  temporal.  But 
▼ery  few  of  them  exercised  any  temporal  power  beyond  the  limits  of 
their  own  principality,  where  they  rule,  as  Gibbon  told  you,  by  the 
voice  of  a  free  people  whom  they  have  redeemed  from  slavery.  Their 
throne  is  established  in  the  affections  of  their  people,  who,  with  rea- 
son, prefer  their  pontiff's  mild  sway  to  kingly  usurpation — the  crosier, 
to  the  sceptre.  The  popes  have  never  taken  the  title  of  kings  of  Rome. 

I  can  shew  from  Waddington  and  Southey,  both  Protestant  histori- 
ans of  the  church,  that  through  centuries  of  darkness  and  doubt  and 
civil  commotion,  while  the  Turk  was  ravaging  the  southern  regions  of 
Europe  and  the  northern  hordes  were  pouring  down  in  swarms  from 
their  ice-bound  regions,  desolating  the  blooming  fields,  and  destroying 
all  that  was  useful  and  beautiful  of  the  works  of  civilization,  the  pope 
was  the  only  savior  of  Europe,  from  their  barbarian  ravages.  He 
gave  to  science  and  to  letters  the  only  refuge  which  could  then  have 
availed  them— the  refuge  of  an  altar— and  the  now  calumniated  monks 
who  reproduced  in  more  auspicious  times,  the  intellectual  ray.  They 
handed  us  the  works  of  the  sages,  and  heroes,  the  poets,  historians 
and  orators  of  Greece  and  Rome  across  the  isthmus  of  the  "  dark  ages 
80  called.    They  preserved  for  us  a  better  gift — ^the  Bible. 

Stn^t*  emtferred  by  the  church.—**  Yet  should  we  be  very  unjust  to  the  Roman 
Catholic  church,  if  we  should  allow  it  to  be  supposed,  that  she  opened  no  recep- 
tacles, for  the  nurture  of  true  excellence;  that  in  her  general  institutions,  espe- 
cially io  her  earlier  age,  she  has  overiooked  the  moral  necessities  of  man— the 
truth  is  far  otherwise.  We  have  repeatedly  observed,  how  commonly,  in  seasons 
of  barbarism,  religion  was  employed  in  supplying  the  defecU  of  civil  government 
and  diffusing  consolation  and  security.  The  Truce  of  God  mitigated  the  fury 
of  private  warfare,  by  limiting  the  hours  of  vengeance,  and  interposing  a  space 
'  '  >■  of  justice  and  humanity.   The  name  of  the  church  was  associated 


me  ijeris  woo    auv*>M^t    »,„„,^,  equally  _^,..  ~, _  1      4- 

peatedly  employed.  In  her  interference  m  the  concerns  of  monarchs  and  nations, 
she  frequently  appeared  as  the  advocate  of  the  weak,and  the  adversary  of  arbi- 
trary power.  Even  the  much  abused  law  of  Asylum  served  through  a  long  pe- 
riod, as  a  check  on  baronial  oppression,  rather  than  an  encouragement  to  crime. 
The  duty  of  charity,  during  the  better  ages  of  the  church,  was  by  no  meant 
nerlected  by  the  secular  clergy,  while  it  was  the  practice  and  office  of  the  mo- 
nastic establishments-  And  even  the  discipline,  so  strictljr  inculcated  by  the 
«ar1ier  prelates,  however  arbitrary  in  its  exercise,  and  pernicious  in  its  mtnue, 
WM  not  unprofitable  in  arresting  the  first  steps,  and  restraining  the  earliest  dis- 
positions to  sin.  Confession  and  penance,  and  the  awful  censures  of  the  church, 
iriien  dispensed  with  discretion,  must  have  been  potent  instruments  for  the  .m- 
proveroent  of  uncivilised  society."  Waddington's  Church  Hist,  page  546.  New 
York  edit.  1835. 

We  now  come  to  the  word  Kju^oc  (cleros,)  which  the  gentleman 
■tys  means  lot  and  not  clergy.    IM  does  mean  the  whole  people  of 


106 


BOMAN  CATHOUC  KKLIGION. 


107 


HfM— clergy  tnd  laity*  Now  if  the  apostle  could  not  lord  it  over  the 
whole  people,  he  could  not  lord  it  orer  the  clergy.  The  pope  does  not  lord 
it  mm  the  consciences  of  either  clerinr  or  laity— he  helieves  as  they  do. 

The  apostles  sent  Peter  and  John  to  Samaria.  Peter  and  John 
prohaUy  dffeted  themselTes  for  the  early  mission— Peter*  to  whom 
€od  had  given  superior  power— «nd  John,  who  had  leaned  on  the  bo- 
som of  Jes«8  at  sapper— both  pre-eminent  apostles,  to  confirm  the  peo- 
|iie  of  Samaria. 

No  man  can  read  the  New  Testament  attentiTely  without  seeinsv  at 
mimost  every  page,  the  endence  of  Peter's  divinely  appointed  and  ae* 
Inowledged  primacy ;  or  the  history  of  the  church,  without  eve^ 
where  discoverinf  the  primacy  of  his  successors.  Not  one  council 
has  been  received  that  the  pope  did  not  approve.  His  approbation  is 
in  the  last  resort,  the  only  certain  test  of  a  counciPs  orthodoxy. 

Peter  si»oke  first  in  the  council  at  Jerusalem.  Peter  was  justly  w 
primande«  by  Paul.  The  very  fact  of  Paul  mentioning  his  boldnesa 
oil  tfaii  oielffiiia,  confirms  the  laet  of  Peter's  supremacy.  So  did  Ire- 
imt  mniMMlfate  with  pope  Victor  in  the  controversy  of  the  Quarto- 
decicnans — about  the  time  of  observing  the  Easter— and  the  pope's 
sentiments  prevailed^-al though  Ireneur  diasuasive  did  good.  So  did 
llie  controversy  about  re-baptization  terminate  between  St.  Cyprian 
and  the  po|>e8  Cornelius  and  Stephen.  The  popes'  decision  was  every 
where  received. 

Now  Paul  himself  did  the  same  for  which  he  blamed  Peter.  He 
knew  and  prized  the  freedom  with  which  Christ  had  made  him  free, 
yet  he  says,  ••  If  meat  scandalise  my  brother,  I  will  not  eat  it  forever." 

He  vainly  persists  in  saying  there  is  no  good  ground  for  asserting  that 
Peter  was  ever  in  Rome,  afWr  all  the  proof  I  have  adduced.  Here  is 
Robinson*!  Calmet,  a  Protestant  dicttooaiy  of  the  Bible,  a  standard  work 
In  Protestant  libiaries.  Calmet  was  a  Mmmm  Caikoae,  He  was  a  prodigy 
of  learning  and  ancient  literature — and  Robinson,  a  Protestant  divine, 
fiMmght  he  could  not  furnish  a  better  gift  to  the  public  than  this  book. 

*•  If  the  reader  wiihct  to  sectha  evidence  from  antiqoitj,  on  which  Peter's 
having  been  at  Rone  rests,  he  will  find  it  fully  set  Torth  bjr  Lar(!n«r.  who  con- 
eludes  his  UM|«iiy  as  follows  :  This  is  the  general,  uncontradicted,  disinterest- 
ed testniooy  of  ancient  writers  in  the  several  parts  of  the  world,  Grc^eks,  Lat- 
Ult,  Syrians.  As  our  Lord's  prediction  concerning  the  death  of  Pt-ter,  is  record* 
ed  in  one  of  the  four  Gospels,  it  is  very  likely  that  rhristi»ns  would  observe  the 
•cisoiapliihiiieiit  of  it,  which  must  have  been  in  some  place.  And  about  this 
place,  there  it  •»  dif  ereoce  among  christian  writers  of  ancient  times.  Never 
any  other  place  was  named  besides  Rome;  nor  did  any  other  citv,  ever  glory  in 
the  martyrdom  of  Peter.  It  is  not  for  our  honor,  nor  for  our  interests,  either 
m  rhrifltians  or  Protestants,  to  deny  the  trath  of  events  ascertained  by  early  and  ' 
well  attested  traditbn.  If  any  make  an  ill  nse  (as  hi  calls  H)  of  snch  facts,  we 
are  not  accountable  for  it.  We  are  not,  from  a  dread  of  such  abuses,  to  over- 
throw the  credit  of  all  history,  the  conaeqnence  of  which  would  be  latal."  Rob- 
ins(ra*s  Calmet,  p.  741. 

The  gentleman  has  said  that  not  one  voice  has  attested  the  fact  of 
the  succession  of  the  Roman  see  for  a  thousand  years.  I  have  quoted 
Eusebitts,  a  Crreek  lather  of  the  fourth  century,  translated  by  a  Pro- 
testant minister,  a  splendid  work.  Here  is  a  list  df  39  bishops  who 
sat  in  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  all  of  whom  he  names  in  the  body  of  the 
work;  also  the  succession  in  the  ehnrehea  of  Jerusalem,  Antioch, 
Rome,  Laodicea,  dbc. 

Of  St.  Petxr. 

(Simim  MagM)  ''entering  the  dQr  of  Rome,  by  the  €OH»pcration  of  that  ma 


lirnant  spirit  which  had  fixed  its  seat  there,  his  attempU  were  soon  so  fcirsnc- 
cSful.  w  to  be  honored  as  a  god,  with  the  erection  of  a  statue  by  the  inhabitants 
ofihat  city.  This,  however,  did  not  continue  long;  for  '^"^ff^j'yp""^*'^,^^ 
reign  of  Claudius,  by  the  benirn  and  gractons  provtdence  ^/^  «o*i.  P«<er  thut 
wmerftd  and  /treat  hpostle,  who,  by  his  coitra^e  took  the  lead  ofaUthe  rttt,  was 
IZduciedTo  llome  ;gain»t  this  p^st  of  mankind.  He.  hke  a  noble  comma.,der 
of  God,  fortified  with  divine  armor,  bore  the  precious  merchandise  of  the  re- 
vealed light  from  the  East  to  those  in  the  West,  announcing  he  li^ht  it»eU; 
and  salutary  docrine  of  the  soul,  the  proclamation  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  ,-* 
Book  11.  chap.  14.  page  64.  ^^  ^^^^ 

"After  the  martyrdom  of  Piral  and  Peter,  Linus  was  the  first  that  received  the 
episcopate  at  Rome."--Book  III.  chap.  2,  page  82. 

"After  Vespasian  had  reigned  about  ten  years,  he  was  succeeded  by  his  son 
Titus;  in  the  Jecond  year  ofwhose  reign.  Linus,  bishop  of  the  church  ofRpme, 
who  had  held  the  office  about  twelve  years,  transferred  it  to  Anacletus.  -Chap. 
13,  page  m  ^^^^  \       ,       ,         ^^ 

"  In  the  twelfth  year  of  the  same  reign.  (Do";*5">)  **^«'  ^fJ'^I^S'  ilf 
been  bishop  of  Rome  twelve  years,  he  was  succeeded  by  Clement.   -Cbap.  16, 

pace  100.  „ 

I  o  Fttarestub. 

•♦  In  the  third  year  of  the  above  mentioned  reign  (Trajan;*,)  Clement,  bislwp 
of  Rome,  committed  the  episcopal  charge  to  Euarestus.  —Chap.  34.  page  120. 

Alexander.  ^     «  u  j 

"  About  the  twelfth  year  of  the  reign  of  Traian after  Euarestus  had 

completed  the  eighth  year  as  bishop  of  Rome,  he  was  succeeded  in  the  episcopal 
office  by  Alexander."— Book  IV.  chap.  1,  page  128. 

X  YRTIT8. 

"  Bat  in  the  year  of  the  same  (Adrian's)  "reign,  Alexander,  bishop  of  Rome, 
died,  havinr  completed  the  tenth  year  of  his  ministrations.    Xystus  was  his  suc- 

cessor."--Chap.  4,  page  130.  

Telesphorus  and  Hyginus. 
-  In  the  ftrat  year  of  this  (Antonine's)  reign,  and  in  the  elCTenth  year  of  his 
episcopate.  Tel«iphoros  departed  this  life,  and  was  succeeded  m  the  chaise  of 
the  Roman  church  by  Hyginus."— Chap.  10,  page  137. 

Pius.  •    j    •. 

"  But  Hyginus  dyinr  after  the  fourth  year  of  his  ofilce,  Pius  received  tiM 
episcopate."— Chap.  11.  page  138. 

"  And  Pius  dying  at  Rome  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  his  episcopate,  the  chnrch 
there  was  governed  by  Anicetus."— Ibid,  page  138. 

SOTER.  .  .       ,  rxr 

«  It  vras  in  the  eighth  year  of  the  above  mentioned  reign,  viz.  that  of  Venis 
that  Anicetus,  who  held  the  episcopate  of  Rome  for  eleven  years,  was  succeeded 
by  Soter."— Chap.  19.  page  156. 
'  Eleutherus. 

"  Soter.bishop  of  Rome,  died  after  having  held  the  episcopitelrflilytjm  He 
was  swxeided  by  Elenthenis.  the  twelfth  in  oider  from  the  j^iertlefc"—Book  V. 
Prelim,  page  168.  ^^^^ 

••  In  the  tenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Commodus.  ElenUierys,  whohad  h«Wti»n 
•piscopato  for  thirteen  years,  was  succeeded  by  Victor.  —Chap,  ^.  pege  20b. 

ZEPHYRUfXJS. 

•But  after  this  author  (Victor,)  had  superintended  the  church.  Zephyrimiswaf 
appointed  his  successor  about  the  ninth  year  of  the  rcign  of  Sevwas.  — cnap 

U.  paKe  214. 

'^  Callisthus  and  Urbanits.  .....        r 

"  In  the  first  year  of  the  latter  (Antonine's  reign,)  Zephyrimis  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  departed  this  life,  after  having  charge  of  the  church  .^'g***^/**™-  "* 
was  silcceSed  in  the  episcopate  by  CallistEus.  who  survived  him  five  years,  and 
left  the  church  to  Urbanus.— Chap.  21 ,  page  242.  *«^ 


OH 

FllRIUUfflFS* 
••WUIitlliMirasllwitetoof  tliia8i,Url»a,wlioliMll»ieiibiilioporRoiiM 

•iglitf«M%  ma  ■nccendcd  by  Pontkii«u."--€lnp.  23,  page  243. 

AirrEROfl  AMD  FABlAIfUt. 

'*€liiidiaii  Mccteded  Muimus  in  the  soTereig^ntir  of  Rome,  when  Pontianiw 
mko  had  heM  tlie  epigcvpate  six  years,  was  succeedMl  bj  Anterot  in  ihm  chordi 
or  Rome;  h«  also  is  soccacded  by  Fabianus.**— Chnp.  29,  paga  248. 

ComiXLius. 

*lltelii. . . .  raised  a  persecution    against  the  church,  in  which  Fabianas 

•tiirered  martyrdom,  and  was  succeeded  as  bishop  of  Rone  by  Cornelius."- 

Chap.  39,  page  254 

Lucius  AND  Stephen. 
**  Afler  Comelins  had  held  the  episcopal  office  at  Rome  about  three  yean,  ha 
as  succeeded  bir  Lucius,  but  the  latter  did  not  hold  the  office  quite  eirht 

months,  when  dying  he  transferred  it  to  Stephen.**— Book  VII.  chap.  2,  page 

211. 

Stephen  and  Xtstus  II. 
••  Bnt  after  Stephen  had  held  the  episcopal  office  two  yean,  he  was  succeeded 
byXystos."-Chap.5,page273. 

DiONTSIUS. 

•I  Xyilus  had  been  bishop  of  Rome  eleven  years,  when  ha  was  succeeded  bf 
Dionysius.**— Chap.  27,  page  302. 


"  Dionysius,  who  had  been  bishop  of  Rome  for  nana  yean,  was  succeeded  by 
Felix.'*— Chap.  30,  page  308.  r  *  j 

EUTTCHIANUS,  CaiUS,  AND  MAKCBIXINUS. 
**  At  this  time  Felix,  havinr  hrld  the  episcofiate  at  Rome  five  yean,  was  suc- 
ceeded bv  Eutychianus,  and  be  did  not  hold  the  office  quite  ten  months,  when  he 
fall  his  place  to  be  occupied  by  Caius  of  our  own  day.    Cains,  also,  presided 
about  ineen  years,  when  he  was  succeeded  by  MarceUinos.** — Chap.  32,  page  310 

MlLTIADEt. 

**Con9tantine  Augustas,  to  Miltiades  bishop  of  Rome.'*— Book  X.  chap.  /» 


'T; 


need  only  nfer  to  what  I  ha¥e  vead  from  this  authentic  historian 
for  splendM  and  indisputable  proof.    Here  is  the  iaccession  equally 

iilain  in  all  the  churches,  but  iongeii  in  Borne*  Thence  it  has  been 
aithfullj  noticed,  and  regularly  perpetuated  in  an  uninterrupted  chain 
of  pontiffs  down  to  the  present  chief  pastor,  auspiciously  presiding 
Of er  all  the  church. 

Minr,  ray  friend,  in  the  name  of  God  what  is  to  become  of  this  eon- 
troveiay,  when  testimony  like  this  la  overlooked!  And  to  close  the 
testlmonT  of  Eusebius  who  has  embodied  that  of  the  preceding  ages, 
ao  as  to  leave  no  doubt,  that  the  same  identical  doctrinea,  the  present 
onsanlsatioiit  orders  and  sacraments  of  the  Catholic  church  were  those 
of  the list  afea  of  Christianity,  and  heresy  too  the  same  then  that  it  now 
la.  I  cravo  your  attention  for  one  of  the  most  instructive  chaptera 
tliat  could  poaatbly  be  lead  on  a  subject  of  such  abaoibing  Intdfeat  to 
Ihe  Christian. 

Qf  JVbvn/iif,  ki$  manntnamd  Kahit$^  and  hit  herem. 
About  this  tune  appeared  Novatus  fNovatian)  a  presbrter  of  the  church  of 
Rome,  and  a  aiaa  elevated  with  haughtiness  against  these  (that  had  ftillen),  as  if 

there  was  no  room  for  them  to  hope  salvation,  not  even,  if  they  performed  every 
thing  fiir  a  gmMuna  and  pare  confession.  He  thus  became  the  leader  of  the  pe. 
culiar  heresy  of  those  who.  in  the  pomp  of  their  imagiaationi,  called  themselves 
'^-'*»*iri.  A  very  large  council  being  held  on  account  of  this,  at  which  sixty  in- 
of  the  bishopSfbut  a  still  greater  number  of  presbyters  and  deacons  were 
nt ;  tba  pastors  of  the  remaining  provinces,  accordmg  to  their  places,  deli- 
'  lly  what  should  be  done:  this  decree  was  passed  by  all;  "That 
«  and  those  who  so  arrogantly  united  with  him,  and  those  tlial 
to  adopt  the  uncharitable  ai  d'most  inhuman  opinion  of  the  niao. 


Cathan. 

deed, 
iwesew 
berated  aai 

II* 


SOMAN   CATHOLIC   RSUGION. 


100 


Iheie  Ihey  considered  «m<>nL***°'*  IliLJ?^  '  u'Tll^ 

that  brethren  who  had  incbrred  any  calamity,  ihonld  be  treated  and  healed  wiin 

^•Trre1^"al"ep:;^/cor^^^                   of  Rome,  addressed  to  Fabins  W- 
shop  of  Antioch,  w*hich  show  the  transactions  of  the  <'^.""<''  .  o^/^°™5/ !*  T^^ 
the  opinion-  of  all  those  in  Italy  and  Africa  and  the  '^fijo"* '^f «;« *   9^^^".  ^^j? 
are  a^»o  written  in  the  Roman  tongue,  from  Cyprian,  and  the  t>"bops  w,^  h.m  m 
Africa.     In  these,  it  is  shewn  that  they  ai^  agree  m  the  "f"*^  *UL^  of  L? 
those  who  had  fellen  under  severe  temptations,  and  also  in  the  P^F^^^^  *»»  ^ 
communicating  the  author  of  the  heresv.  wid  all  that  were  of  »>«  PJ^y-    T<> 
these  is  attached  also  an  epistle  from  dornelius  on  the  decree,  of  the  council, 
besides  others  on  the  deeds  of  Novatus,  from  which  we  may  add  extracU,  that 
those  who  read  the  present  work  may  know  the  97"'"»^«"^*  «*i;^>;"^^^^^ 
What  kind  of  a  character  Novatus  was,  Cornelius  informs  Fabius,  writing  as  tol- 
lows-    **  But  that  you  may  know,  says  he,  how  this  singular  man.  vvho  foru.erly 
Zm  toXep  s^o?ate,Ld  secVetfy  concealed  wiUiin  himself  this  precipitate 
mSn.  making  use  of  those  confessors  that  adhered  to  him  from  the  beg.nn.n5 
as  a  cloak  for  hi!  own  folly.  I  will  proceed  to  relate:  Maximus.  •  Prejbyter  of 
our  church,  and  Urbanus.  twice  obtained  the  highest  reputation  for  th^r  con- 
fessions.   Sidonins  also,  and  Celerinus,  a  man  who.  J^.  *»»«  fJ-^S^n^sShis  ow^ 
•▼erv  kind  of  torture  in  the  roost  heroic  manner,  and.  by  the  firmn«8  ot  lus  own 
fauS^sSengSened  the  weakness  of  the  flesh,  complete  y  worsted  the  •^versa^. 
These  meJTtherefore,  as  they  knew  him,  and  haJ  well  sounded  h»  artificeand 
duplicity.  i»  also  his  peijurieJ  and  falsehoods,  his  dissocial  and  savage  chara^r, 
retumel  to  the  holy  SSrch,  and  announced  all  hb  devices  and  w'^^^edn^  which 
he  had  for  a  long  tiie  dissembled  within  himself,  and  this  too  in  the  pr^^^/[ 
many  bishops;  Ind  the  same  also,  in  the  presence  of  many  P-^^y^e^^  *nd  a 
great  numblr  of  laymen,  at  the  same  time  Tamenl.ng  and  -""TO^'ng  that  tbey 
Kd  been  seduced,  ind  had  abandoned  the  church  for  a  short  time  through  the 
agency  of  that  artful  and  malicious  beast."    After  a  little,  be  further  says :  We 
hive  ^n.  belored  brother,  within  a  short  time,  ^^^^^^^'^i^^J^^^.'S!^^ 
change  in  him.    For  this  most  illustrious  man.  and  he  who  •*'™^„!^'*J»  |^  ™J*? 
dreadful  oaths,  that  he  never  aspired  to  the  episcopate,  hassuddenly  appear^  a 
bishop,  as  thriwn  mnong  us  by  some  machine.  Jo' this  dogmatist,  this  (pre. 
tended)  champion  of  ecSlesiastlcal  discipline,  when  he  attempted  to  «J«e  "^ 
usurp  the  episcopate  not  giren  him  from  above,  selected  two  desperate  «>"*ctera 
as  h£  assocmtes.  to  send  them  to  some  small,  and  that  the  smallest,  part  of  ita^. 
and  from  thence,  by  some  fictitious  plea,  to  impose  upon  three  bishops  there.  m«a 
altogether  ignorant  and  simple,  affirming  and  decUnug.that  it  ™  "fS!"'^* 
theirto  come  to  Rome  in  afl  haste,  that  all  the  dissension  which  i^adA«*  am- 
en miffht  be  removed  through  their  mediation,  in  conjunction  with  the  other  lu. 
shops.^When  these  men  hSd  come,  being  as  before  ?»>»«'7«^',»'"V'""PII/^ 
plaff  in  discerning  the  artifices  and  villany  of  the  wicked.  »«*!  ^^'.^n /J\"*  ."P 
with  men  of  theSsme  stamp  with  himself,  at  the  tenth  hour,  when  heated  wrtli 
w  AS  and  snrfeitinr.  they  forced  them  by  a  kind  of  shadowy  and  easpty  imposi. 
SrXXtoSkfe^CrpWte  u^n  him.  and  which,  though  by  no  means 
SSSed  to  him  he  chums  by  fiSad  s!^  treachery     One  of  th^.  not  long  after^. 
turned  to  his  church,  mourning  and  confessing  his  ^^^J.^J^^^'J^^^^  Jl'f^; 
muaed  as  a  layman.as  all  the  people  present  interceded  for  him.and  we  -eot  sue- 
cessoft  to  the  other  bishops.  oVdalning  them  in  the  pbce  where  they  were.    This 
asserterot  the  gospel  then  did  not  know  that  there  shouWbe  but  one  bishop  m 
a  catholic  church.*  (**  •-••>.««i  im-».n»*«). ^^_^ 

•  The  word  catholic,  in  its  Greek  etymology,  means  aniveisal,  a>  we  hawe  ■«»»»««»«•"• 
■Uined  it  i«ThU  trsntUtion.  It  is  applied  to  the  Cbristiaii.  as  a  aniversal  church,  narllj 
W^wtJL  hf^the  aneient  churEbof  the  Jews,  wKich  wa.1  -sited,  ?•««'.  »"<rf^ 
tLaUr  Tui  duratH«.  subjects  sod  country.  Tlw  Christian  »  also  caMed  a  aniversal  or 
Shiic  ehVrcb  b^^^^  in  repsrd  to  docli ine  bold  ^  »»mp,r  q*^  ub^qtie,  qn^ 

S  smSJa?  In  uSutter  view,  wl.kh  it  shonld  be  welloUnred  is  the  original  ap,a.ea. 
lLr7ir?vno«ymo«s  with  0rtA^az.  Th»  is  evident,  fiom  the  fact  that  o.r  aaihor  applies 
SrS  SSwi^SXs  in  other  psru  of  l.is  history.  And  in  the  prei^nt  .nstauce  the  ex- 
liiiSnTmnSS  e^tAo/ic  ckStk.  It  is  in  a  sense  allied  to  this  also,  that  we  are,  na 
SSTU^fZindrbe  title  of  our  general,  (culk^c)  7«' »«' J^,,^  Jf*  .T^r.^r; 
Thev  are  tmtkOie,  because  as  consonant  to  the  doctrines  of  tbe  chaich  w  aU  respects  lacr 
have^ien  d««niver«iUy  received.     In  tkis  ..nss.  ths  let-  is  also  syneoymoas  with  cam 

•atco/ 


110 


TB  ON   TlIK 


BOMAM   CATHOUC    RSLIOION 


111 


i 


r 


Iiii4ieii,lMi«i«vw,kiWttUlnicw.(for  kowooiiMlwtM  ignoraat  f)  tlwi  iheM 
^f^^'^J'^'^^y^'l^ijr^'n,  Mvea  deacoiif«  m?«ii  rab-dewxiiit,  ibrtjr-two  acolathi 
(CMffca,)  exorcists,  rmulers.  Mid  janitors,  in  all  fifty-two;  widows,  with  tJbe  afflicted 
MM  awMlj,  more  tliaii  fiflecii-liuiidred;  all  whicli  tlM  goodness  and  love  of  God 
d#tll  npiiofl  and  noimsli.  But  neitluir  this  neat  number,  so  necessary  in  the 
church,  nor  those  that  by  the  providence  of  God  were  wealthy  and  opulent,  toge- 
llwr  with  the  ianuniemble  iitultitude  of  the  people,  were  able  to  recall  him  and 


t  lliai  nroin  tnch  a  desperate  and  presumptuous  course."  And  again,  after  these, 
t.j  "&*'"*  ^  following:  "  Now  jet  os  also  tell  by  what  means  and  conduct  he 
■■alM  ■aanruice  to  claim  the  e|iisco[Mt«.  Whether,  indeed,  it  was  because  hn 
irasti^^igied  in  the  church  from  the  bt'ginntnr,  and  endured  nwny  conflicts  for  her, 
and  encountered  many  and  great  danst  r«  in  the  cause  of  true  religion?  None  of  all 
Ihit.  To  him,  indeed,  the  author  and  instigator  of  his  failh  was  Satan,  who  enter* 
•d  into  and  dwelt  in  him  a  long  lime.  Who,  aided  by  the  eiorcists,  when  attackwl 
^thanobstinate  disease,  and  being  supposed  at  the  point  of  death,  was  baptise*? 
■HL'IK*"**""^'  ****  *?***  **"  which  he  lay ;  if,  indeed,  it  be  proper  to  say  that  one  ltk« 
1  fwciv*  baptism.  But  neither  when  he  recovered  from  disease,  did  be  par- 
"*''*"*"''       .which  the  rules  of  the  church  prescribed  as  a  duty,  nor  washt 


m  (m  minuation)  hy  the  bishop.  But  as  he  did  not  obtain  this,  ilow  could  ha 
m  IM  Holy  Spirit  V'  And  again, soon  allar,  he  says:  "  He  denied  he  was  • 
_  bjtnr.thimli  cowardice  and  the  love  of  life,  in  the  time  of  persecution.  For 
when  reqoitM  aiid  exhorted  by  the  deacons,  that  he  should  go  forth  from  his  re- 
trrattio  wMclllin  had  imprisoned  himself,  and  should  come  to  the  relief  of  the  bre* 
tfaron,  aafar  •§  was  proper  and  in  the  power  of  a  preaby  ter  to  assist  brethren  requir- 
ing relief,  he  was  so  lar  from  yielding  to  any  exhortation  of  the  deacons,  that  hn 
want  away  owuidad  and  left  them.  For  he  said  that  he  wished  to  be  a presby  ter  no 
l«Mig«r,  for  he  was  an  admirer  of  a  different  philosophy."  After  this,  he  adds 
■■other  deed,  the  worst  of  all  the  man's  absurdities,  thus  :  *•  For  having  madi 
!■•  oblation,  and  distributed  a  part  to  each  one.  whilst  giving  this,  he  compels  th« 
■oh^pv  men  to  swear  instead  of  blessing  ;  holdinr  the  hands  of  the  one  receir 
ipg •  wiih  both  his  own,  and  uotleUinir  them  go  until  he  had  sworn  in  these  words, 
for  I  ahaJI  rapaaC  the  very  words:  *  Swear  to  me.  by  (he  body  and  blood  of  our 
"**"  Const,  that  you  will  never  desert   me,  nor  turn  to   Cornelius.* 


And  th«  ttnhi^ip|nian  is  then  not  suitrred  to  taste  until  be  had  fintt  cursed  him 
•Ml;  and  instead  of  saying  Amen,  after  he  had  taken  the  bread,  he  says,  •!  will 
no  tonger  return  to  ComeFius."  And.  after  other  uiallen,  he  again  proceeds,  aa 
mllowB  :  **  Now,yoo  most  know,  that  he  is  stripped  and  abandoned,  the  brethren 
lMmriq|him  every  day  and  returninic  to  the  church.  He  was  also  excouimunicat- 
od  by  Moses,  that  blcMed  witness,  who  but  lately  endured  a  glorious  and  wonder- 

2*  '"S?'"!?*"*  *"**  ******  "**•*•*  J®*  among  the  living,  seemg  the  audacity  and 
■•*%«•  *ho  "lan,  excluded  him  from  the  communion,  together  with  th« 
•  Ck  ^*^  that  had  cut  themselves  off  from  the  church."  At  the  close  of  iha 
•piMk,hanr<t  a  list  of  the  bishops  who  had  como  to  Rome,  and  had  discarded 
tha  moornpble  ditpotitinn  of  Novatus;  at  the  same  timo  adding  the  names,  lo« 
gether  with  the  churches  governed  by  each.  He  also  mentioned  those  that  wero 
aot  present  ai  Home,  bol  who.  by  letter,  assented  to  the  dociiion  of  the  foimer. 
S^iff!!?®**^"*'^  f^  ****  particular  citias  whewse  each  om  had  written. 
wnkialho  aeoooat  written  by  Cornelius  to  Fabius  bishop  of  Antiocfa^— From 
fyfjlW-l*«;^  Hist,  transl.  by  Rov.  C.  F.  Cmil,  Book 

..    ^  Mafpad  II,  X  M 

lIlL  CmmBLi.  risea— 

1  ia¥e  tomo  iMfMct,  mw  frkoat,  not  only  to  the  aodieneo  wlio  hear, 
ittlto  IkoM  wki  nay  mtA  this  ditooitton ;  and,  tkerefoie,  I  with  my 
ainiMM  to  ha  ai  eonliniioiit  and  onbroken  as  pofsible.  1  eoold,  indeed, 
WMhlhat  ay  infeoioua  and  eloauent  opponent  would  reply  to  my 
■piiaiMiain  rafular  aeauen«se,  and  thus  give  more  of  ayatem  and  tenacity 
to  oar  debate.   Before  I  trace  his  aigsaf  course,  I  wiali  to  add  to  my  last 

rcka  mm  kiidmd  eonsiderattona.    While  it  behooves  him  to  prove 
PMmr  was  iraC  bishop  of  Rome,  I  am  fratuitonsly  in  display  of  my 
lasoiitees,  as  the  advocate  of  Protestantism,  rather  spontaneously  prov- 


ine  a  aeirative,  or  afaowiiiff  that  Peter  never  was  bishop  of  Rome.  Two 
considerations  may  be  added  to  my  remarks  on  this  hwd :  let  The 
special  commission,  which  he  had  to  the  Jews  as  Paul  had  to  Uie 
Gentiles,  precludes  the  idea  of  his  here  devoting  himself  to  any  por- 
tion of  Oie  Gentile  world.  The  "ministry  of  the  circumcision  was 
committed  to  him,  and  therefore  not  the  Roman  capital;  but  rather  the 
Syrian  capital  or  Jerusalem  should  have  been  the  place  of  his  location, 
ltd.  His  commission,  as  apostle,  precludes  the  idea  of  his  bein^  sta- 
tioned  as  hUkop  at  any  one  place.  You  cannot  place  Peter  as  bishop 
of  Rome,  any  more  tiian  you  can  make  the  president  of  the  Umteri 
States  mayor  of  Cincinnati.  The  duties  of  these  officers  are  not  more 
incompatible  than  the  duties  of  an  apostie  and  a  resident  bishop.  What 
are  the  duties  of  Uie  bishop's  chair  t  Are  tiiey  not  to  watch  over  a 
particular  diocese?  What  does  the  aposties'  commission  say  1  "  Go 
ye  into  all  the  world,  and  announce  the  glad  tidings  to  the  whole  crea- 
tion." It  would  be  as  easy  to  prove  that  the  bishop  of  London  may 
be  vicar  of  Bray,  or  curate  of  St.  Ives,  as  that  Peter  was,  or  could  be, 
bishop  of  Rome.  These  two  considerations  deserve  the  attention  of 
my  friend,  and  1  hope  that  he  will  not  pass  them  too  in  silence. 

That  every  important  office,  essential  to  the  government  of  any  com- 
munity, must  have  a  place  clearly  specific  in  the  constitution  is  scarce- 
ly necessary  to  prove;  yet,  as  my  opponent  seems  to  slur  over  this 
matter,  I  shall  read  a  sentence  or  two  of  the  Constitution  ot  the  United 
Slates,  to  show  that  in  the  estimation  of  its  framers,  it  was  necessary 
to  have  a  distinct  assertion  of  the  office  and  power  of  tiie  president. 

Art.  II.  Sect.  I.  The  executive  power  shall  be  vested  in  a  President  of  the 
United  Sutes  of  America-  He  shall  hold  his  office  during  the  term  of  foui 
vears,  and,  together  with  the  Vice  President,  chosen  for  the  same  term  as  fol 

Sect.  2.  *♦  Each  state  shall  appoint.in  such  manner  as  the  legislature  there- 
of  may  direct,  a  number  of  electors,  equal  to  the  whole  number  of  senators  and 
representatives  to  which  the  state  may  be  entitled  in  the  congress ;  but  no  senator 
or  represeiiUtive,  or  person  holding  any  office  of  trust  or  profit  under  the  Unit- 
ed States,  shall  be  appointed  an  elector."     The  Americans  Gutde,p.  20. 

Now  the  head  of  the  christian  chmch  was,  at  least,  as  wise  as  the 
convention  which  framed  this  instrument,  foreseeing  all  the  difficulties 
of  the  church  in  all  time,  and  as  he  was  determined  to  make  all  things 
plain,  and  certainly  he  was  as  capable  as  they  to  reveal  and  express 
his  own  will,  had  he  resolved  to  build  his  church  on  the  shoulder  of 
St.  Peter,  he  would  have  unequivocally  expressed  it.  He  would  have 
defined  the  office,  appointed  the  first  officer,  and  legislated  the  mode 
of  election.  The  practice  of  electing  popes  in  the  church  of  Rome  is 
a  candid  acknowledgment  that  there  is  no  few  in  the  case :  for  they 
have  had  very  different  modes  at  different  periods  of  their  history. 
What  would  we  Americans  say,  if  every  few  years  a  new  mode  should 
be  adopted,  without  regard  to  the  constitution  1  Would  they  submit 
to  such  a  chief  magistrate! 

The  gentleman  proceeded  to  read  and  reiterate  his  remarks  oa  two 
passages  of  scripture,  often  before  us:  he  objects  to  my  criticism  on 
the  last  chapter  of  John.  His  last  remarks  enable  me  to  give  it  a 
more  thorough  exposition.  He  says  my  construction  "requires  the 
meusaiive  for  these,^'  I  say,  with  more  of  the  philosophy  of  language, 
his  construction  requires  the  nominative.  The  question  would  have 
been  plainly  this :  "  Do  you  love  me  more  than  these  love  me."  n^«>» 
it  is  true,  always  requires  tiie  genitive;  but  the  whole  construction  of 


^-■m  H"       -n^ 


1 12 


DIBATS  OW   THIS 


HOMAir   CATnOLIG    RELIGION. 


113 


|ji, 
*■ 


B 


tli«  aenteiioe  wonia  limTe  been  ehanfed,  Iftkem  w«n>  to  be  the  tiomina- 
tive  to  tlie  mth  befe  understood.  My  constraction  is  critically  correct 
■8  the  sentence  now  reads,  but  it  will  not  bear  his  coosiroction.  But 
Itiere  is  yet  another  g^eat  assumption  in  the  quotation  of  this  passage 
on  which  I  have  not  yet  emphasized.  He  says,  •*/«rf  niy  sA^^"  means, 
feed  mjpmton,  and  "/eerf  my  /am6»"  means,  feed  my JheJL  Mark  the 
mmmpHmh  that  sheep  sij^iftes  pastors,  and  lambs  the  people !  Where 
4m§  he  ind  authority  for  this  I  If  «*aAM»"  any  where  else  signified 
••efar^,"  and  "lambs"  laity,  there  would  be  some  plsusibility  in  it; 
but  with  the  absence  of  such  usage  it  is  supremely  whimsical  and 
arbitrary ;  and  yet  the  point  of  this  passage  rests  upon  the  assumption 
of  sheep  for  clergy.  So  far  he  presses  it  into  his  service,  for  that 
hishofm  are  to  feed  the  flock  is^  not  dii^puted,  but  that  one  of  them  is 
before  the  others  is  the  question  in  debate. 

The  gentleman,  on  Saturday,  called  my  interpretation  of  this  pas- 
sage a  fish  storjr ;  this  mode  of  treating  so  holy  an  institution,  so 
soFemn  a  matter,  is  not  in  the  true  dignity  of  the  subject,  nor  of  the 
oimition ;  nor  is  it  very  tespeetful  to  the  great  personage  on  whose 
words  we  comment;  bat  the  audience  have  not  met  it  with  a  laugh,  and 
thciefore  I  presume  they  felt  the  incongruity.  In  the  same  style  are 
llie  mornlng*s  remarks  on  the  bontM^  &c.  but  the  bishop  might  remem- 
ber  there  was  more  in  the  premises  than  the  spoils  of  a  single  meal ; 
there  were  many  fish  and  all  the  apparatus  before  them,  but  no  ono 
would  interpret  the  words  of  the  question  in  that  style  on  any  othet 
oecittioiL  It  was  sustenance  in  general,  and  not  a  particular  meal, 
eoneerning  which  the  Savior  spoke. 

The  gentleman  suggests  that,  in  the  1st  chap,  of  John,  Christ  in  his 
first  interview  with  Peter  changes  his  name  to  Cephas;  and  he  as- 
■winee  **that  it  was  that  he  might  afterwards  make  him  the  rock  of 
llie  elmieh !"  It  was  a  very  common  thing  in  the  history  of  the  patri- 
■lehs  and  Jews  to  change  names.  Thus  we  find  from  the  beginning 
of  their  history,  various  instances  of  this:  "Sarai"  is  changed  into 
Sarah i  « Abram"  into  Mrahamt  "Jacob"  into  hraeL  Two  of  the 
apostles  were  called  "  Boanerges"  mm»  (f  Tkundert  but  that  did  not 
convert  them  into  thunder;  neither  did  the  name  Cephas  convert  Peter 
into  a  stone.  If  I  were  to  give  a  reason  for  the  addition  to  Peter*s 
name,  (but  it  was  neither  change  nor  addition,  rightly  considered,)  I 
would  say  that  it  was  most  probably  occasioned  by  the  fact,  that  Daniel 
■fHilEe  of  lie  kingdom  of  the  Messiah  under  the  figure  of  a  ttone  cut 
ont  of  the  mountain.  With  an  eye  probably  to  this  kingdom  of  the 
stone,  (as  Peter  was  the  first  convert,)  his  name  is  improved  by  being 
tranaiaied  into  Syriac ;  for  after  all,  it  is  rather  a  translation  of  Fetrm 
than  an  addition  to  it!  He  was,  however,  the  beginning  of  this  new 
■piritpal  edifice,  and  a  foundation  stone ;  but  only  one  among  many. 

This  kingdom  of  the  stone,  it  is  foretold  by  Daniel,  was  to  com- 
aenee  in  the  days  of  the  Cesars :  but  it  was  to  become  the  kingdom 
of  the  moantain.  It  was,  indeed,  to  become  a  great  mountain,  and  fill 
iie  whole  earth.  This  building  is  composed  of  a  succession  of  foun- 
iaiiens,  provided  only  that  all  the  popra  are  successors  of  Peter,  m 
liftne  of  his  being  the  rock.  To  have  this  whole  building  at  the 
iMndation,  or  to  be  always  laving  new  foundations  in  every  election 
of  a  pope  is  rather  a  singular  idea,  which  grows  out  of  the  extravaganee 
of  the  Romish  assumption. 


The  bishop  observes  that  a  headless  trunk  is  worth  nothing,  and 
would  seem  to  think  that  our  argument  on  that  subject  leaves  the 
church  without  a  head.  Has  the  church  no  other  head  than  the  pope! 
Of  whatever  church  the  pope  is  head,  that  church  is  the  body  c^  the 
pope :  And  Is  it  Christ's  body  too  !  The  Romanists  are  the  body  of 
the  bishop's  church— cut  the  head  off  that  body,  or  annul  the  pope's 
assumption  and  you  destroy  its  organization.  The  gentleman  rightly 
apprpciates  my  argument:  he  feels  that  it  makes  the  church  of  Rome 
a  headless  trunk :  but  the  mistake  is  in  supposing  that  this  annihila> 
tion  of  the  pretension  annuls  the  church  of  Christ.  Jesus  Christ  is  in- 
dependent of  the  pope.  He  is  head ;  and  the  saints  of  all  ages  are  the 
component  parts  of  his  spiritual,  his  myiiical  body. 

The  gentleman's  allusion  to  the  High  Priest  was  peculiarly  unfor- 
tunate There  never  was  but  one  high  priest  at  a  time :  one  in  hea^ 
ven  and  one  on  earth  is  without  a  single  hint  or  allusion  in  the  Bible. 
We  cannot  now  descant  upon  such  an  incongruity. 

The  word  *ifw  (Hierus)^*es^  occurs  not  once  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, in  reference  to  christian  bishops,  or  deacons.  It  is  only  found 
once,  and  that  in  the  apocalyptic  style,  in  all  the. christian  scriptures: 
for  the  idea  of  any  one  officiating  on  the  earth  as  a  sacrificing  priest,  or 
that  christian  bishops  have  aught  of  a  priestly  character  is  anti-christ- 
ian.  But  Christ  is  the  anti-type  of  Aaron.  The  order  of  Aaron  is  ex- 
tinct. The  order  of  Melchisidec  is  the  model  of  the  Christian  High 
Priesthood.  Christ  is  called  of  God  as  was  Aaron :  but  he  is  called 
to  officiate  after  the  order  of  Melchisidec.  The  doctrine  of  Protestants 
is,  that  their  High  Priest  made  one  great  sacrifice  for  sin  on  earth : 
and  that  he  offered  it  in  the  heavens ;  and  that  by  one  offering  of  him- 
self, he  has  perfected  the  sanctified.  "  Brethren,  consider  the  high  priest 
of  our  profession,  Jesus  Christ."  He  ever  lives  and  ever  intercedes, 
and  is  able  to  save  to  the  uttermost  all  that  come  by  him  to  God.  We, 
therefore,  need  no  high  priest  on  earth. 

The  gentleman  has  told  us  too  often  of  his  lore  for  America,  and  hie 
love  for  England.  If  he  repeats  these  declarations  so  often,  we  shall 
begin  to  think  he  loves  too  much  in  word,  and  too  little  in  fact.  He 
tells  you  of  30,000  English  bayonets  employed  in  defence  of  the  pa- 
pacy. And  what  of  this  1  England  is  the  cradle  of  all  political  free- 
dom. Our  notions  of  free  government  were  all  promul^ed  in  English 
books,  and  taught  in  English  schools  before  they  were  imported  here. 
We  have,  ind^  practis^  upon  the  science  of  free  government  mora 
than  our  mother  country.  But  as  in  America,  we  tolerate  all  religions : 
so  the  British  empire  in  erery  country  where  she  has  territory  or  sub- 
jects, supports  and  protects  all.  England  tolerates  every  thing.  She 
supports  Catholicism  in  Canada,  Episcopacy  in  England,  Presbyteri- 
anisrfi  in  Scotland,  and  Paganism  in  the  East  Indies.  Is  she  not  too 
free  and  tolerant  for  my  opponent,  and  for  many  Protestants  ? !  She 
takes  no  part  against  any  religion.  The  popular  doctrine  in  England 
at  tills  moment  is,  that  Church  and  State  ought  not  to  be  amalgama- 
ted, or  consociated  under  the  same  earthly  head.  Indeed,  she  is  dis- 
posed to  follow  her  American  children  very  far  in  this  doctrine. 

The  bishop  seems  to  apply  to  Peter  what  was  common  to  all  the 

apostles,  "Whatsoever  you  shall  hind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  in 

heaven ;  and  whatsoever  you  shall  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in 

heaven."    I  remark  upon  this  passage,  that  when  the  Messiah  gave 

k3  8 


114 


UfWBmMl^  A Mt     1#*»      M  alii 


BOHAN   CATHOLIC   BEU6I0X. 


lU 


"4  I 


Urn  ktft  to  Peter  to  open  the  klnfdom  of  hea^eii  to  Jews  and  Gentiles, 
lie  iM  not  appropriate  to  bim  the  sole  and  ezeloilTe  power  of  binding 
tod  loosing:  this  ^wer  he  bestowed  on  mil  the  apostles*  For  after 
iMer  opened  the  kingdom,  they  all  introduced  citizens  into  il,  as  well 
•8  he;  and  had  the  same  official  power;  for  as  John  says,  chap.  30: 
he  adidraseed  them  all — "  As  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  so  do  I  send 
f  on;  wheat  aoefer  sins  yon  remit  they  are  remitted  to  them,  and  whose 
•oefvr  wbm  you  retain  they  are  retained  !"-~This  was  spoken,  in  sub- 
•mnee,  repeatedly  to  them  all.  It  is  therefore  asserting  too  much,  to 
nay  that  Peter  alone  was  gified  with  this  power.  He  only  used  it 
irst.  They  always  exercised  it  in  its  true  intent  and  meaning.  I  shall 
be  glad  to  iesume  again  the  regular  order.  ^ 

We  baie  heard  much  about  the  bishops  of  Rome  and  how  they  can 
hn  traoed  back  even  to  Peter,  &c.,  ^.  I  wish  my  learned  opponent 
would  eooine  himself  to  the  proposition  in  debate,  and  permit  me  to 
go  through  with  this  argument,  for  succession.  Then  I  will  show  of 
how  much  value  are  the  traditionary  enumerations  found  in  Eusebius^ 
from  whoee  authors  I  can  make  out  two  or  three  snccessions. 

The  gentleman  brings  up  the  erudition  of  the  4th  century.  I  would 
as  soon  call  on  people  in  this  room  for  testimony  that  the  battle  of  Bun- 
ker's hill,  or  Blenheim  was  so  and  so  fought — not  one  of  whom  lived 
at  that  time ;  as  on  persons  living  in  one  century  to  prove  what  hap- 

rned  in  centuries  before  they  were  bom.  In  the  fourth  century  there 
OM  writer  testifies  to  the  succession.  What  a  decisive  proof !  Is 
there  any  testimony  for  the  first  two  hundred  yean  affirming  this  suc- 
cession I  I  affirm  that  there  is  not.  All  the  tradition  on  earth  fails 
just  in  this  radical  and  essential  point ! 

Again :  tradition  is  wholly  silent  on  the  election  of  the  first  popes. 
Ho  one  pretends  to  tell  how  Peter  and  Linus  and  Clement  were  in- 
leeted  with  the  offiee.  Tradition  is  even  in  the  hands  of  Catholics 
ashamed  to  depose  any  thing  upon  this  point  We  all  know  how  to 
disfMiee  of  tradition  three  hundred  years  too  late*  in  other  matters;  and 
I  Ihink  to  the  matter  of  fact  people  of  this  generation,  it  must  appeal 

Cposterous  to  prove  an  event  by  those  who  lived  one,  two,  and  three 
ulied  years  after. 

Ivemius  was  introduced  as  a  witness  of  Peter^s  having  been  bishof 
of  Rome :  but  Irencus  does  not  sa¥  so  on  bb  own  responsibility :  foi 
he  lived  at  the  close  of  the  second  centnry.  With  him  it  was  only 
MmMam,  Again,  his  testimony  of  the  church  of  Rome,  having  been 
^ImlMf  by  Pan!  and  Peter  la  cartainly  false ;  and  his  saying  that  Poly- 
carp  was  appointed  bishop  of  Smyrna  bv  the  apodUtf  greatly  weakens 
his  traditionary  statements  concerning  the  Roman  see :  for  Polycarp 
■mH  havn  been  ordained  in  the  year  97,  as  he  died  in  the  year  147, 
having  been  50  years  bishop  of  Smyrna.  Consequently  it  was  impos- 
sible he  could  have  been  ordained  by  the  apostles :  but  of  this  again. 
While  my  3ppooent  speaks  so  fluently  of  early  fathers,  and  of  the 
short  interval  of  two  or  three  hundred  years  from  Christ,  he  seems  to 
forget  how  long  a  hundred  years  is,  and  how  few  know  much  about 
the  events  that  happened  a  hundred  years  ago.  Even  now,  in  this  age 
•f  books  and  printing,  and  steam  presses,  and  steam-boats,  and  rail- 
oads,  and  general  reading,  how  few  of  us  could  accurately,  from  me- 
mory relate  the  history  of  the  American  Revolution  !  And  yet  the  gen- 
tleoian  talks  about  the  opportunities  of  a  person  to  ascertain  these  hit- 


y 


toric  facts,  one  or  two  hundred  years  after  they  occurred,  fromtradiUon 
too,  in  an  age  when  all  these  facilities  which  we  enjoy  were  unknown. 
Is  not  this  tradition  a  very  loose  and  uncertain  witness! — [Time 
expired.] 

Tvodve  d^clock,  M* 

BiSBOP  PimcBLL  rises — 

Iren«us  lived  in  the  second  century.  He  was  a  disciple  of  Poly- 
carp, who  was  a  disciple  of  John  the  evangelist.  Irencus,  was  bish- 
op of  Lyons  in  France.  The  chain  of  testimony  consists  of  three  links. 
John  the  evangelist,  Polycarp  of  Smyrna,  IreuaBus  of  Lyons.  John 
told  Polycarp  what  Jesus  did— Polycarp  told  Irenaeus  what  John  had 
told  him,  and  Iren«u8  bears  testimony  here.  This  edition  was  pub- 
lished by  a  Protestant  divine,  named  Nich  :  Gallaisus.  It  is  dedicated  to 
Grindal,  bishop  of  London  ;  and  as  I  do  not  like  to  advance  any  thing 
merely  en  Catholic  testimony,  I  prefer  the  Protestant  to  the  Catholic 
edition  of  this  father's  works.  Irenaeus  distinctly  says  :«*  Since  it 
would  be  very  long  to  enumerate  in  this  volume  the  succession  of  bish- 
ops in  all  the  churches,  by  appealing  to  the  tradition  of  a  church  the 

GREATEST  AND  MOST  ANCIENT  AND  KNOWN  TO  ALL,  whlch  WaS  found- 
ed and  established  at  Rome,  by  the  two  most  glorious  apostles,  Peter 
and  Paul ;  a  tradition  which  she  has  from  the  apostles,  and  the  faith 
which  she  announces  to  men,  and  which  comes  down  to  us  through 
the  succession  of  bishops,  we  confound  all  those  who  in  any  way, 
either  through  evil  self  complacency  or  vain  glory,  or  blindness  and 
perversity  trather  otherwise  than  is  meet.  For  with  this  church,  on 
account  of^'her  more  powerful  principality,  it  is  necessary  that 
EVERY  CHURCH  AGREE,  that  is  the  faithful  who  are  on  all  sides,  m 
which  church,  the  tradition  of  the  apostles  has  been  preserved  by  the 
faithful  who  are  on  all  sides."   Iren.  lib.  iii.  chap.  3,  (adversus  haere- 

ses  1 

Eusebius,  has  preserved  for  us  a  letter,  written  by  the  martyrs  who 
suffered  in  Gaul,  in  the  19th  year  of  Antonius  Verus,  and  who  were 
charffed  by  the  Pagans,  as  they  say  in  their  address  to  their  iellow- 
citizens  in  Phrygia,  "with  feasts  ofThyestes,  {who  ate  pari  of  hu 
oum  «m,)  and  the  incests  of  (Edipus,  and  such  crimes  as  are  neither 
lawful  for  us  to  speak  nor  to  think,  and  such  indeed,  as  we  do  not  be- 
lieve were  committed."  In  this  document  the  martyrs  commend  Ire- 
naeus,-then  a  presbyter  of  the  church  of  Lyons,  to  pope  Eleutherus, 
whom  Iren«us  appealed  to  on  the  subject  of  the  Quarto-deciman  con- 
troversy. I  have  this  letter  here  in  Greek.  It  may  perhaps  have 
more  authority  if  I  read  the  originaL 

Thus  do  we  perceiVe  that  Eleutherus  was  styled  "  father  and  bishop 
of  Rome,"  by  thes«  'Ilustrious  confessors  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  hu 
favor  invoked  in  behalf  of  their  brother. 

In  book  III.  chap.  3,  (the  title  of  this  chapter  is,  of  the  apostolic 
tradition,  or  the  succession  of  bishops  in  the  churches  from  the  apos- 
tles.) "  These  blessed  apostles  (Peter  and  Paul)  founding  and  insli- 
tutino  the  church,  delivered  the  care  of  administering  it  to  Linus,  of 
whom  Paul  makes  mention  in  his  epistle  to  Timothy.  To  him  suc- 
ceeded Anacletus,  after  whom  Clement  obtains  the  episcopacy,  in 
the  third  place  from  the  apostles,  who  had  seen  and  conferred  with  the 
apostles,  who  had  heard  their  preaching  sounding  in  his  pars,  and  bad 


116 


BOHAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


in 


\  I 


with  bit  own  eyes  beheld  llieir  tradMont.  Nor  was  he  the  only 
them  weie  many  more  yet  Imof  who  had  been  taugrbt  by  the  apostlea. 
Under  this  Clement,  when  no  inconsiderable  discussion  oc^^uned 
amonp  the  brethren  at  Corinth,  the  charch  of  Rome  addressed  to  them 
most  forcible  letters,  gatherings  them  together  in  peace,  repairing  iheir 
fmUkf  mnd  armounein^  to  them  the  ^rmiiiom  they  had  recently  receiff 
edfrmn  the  mm»iie».  To  Clement  succeeded  Euaristus,  and  to  Euaris- 
tns,  Alexanoer;  next  was  Sextos,  sixth  from  the  apostles,  and  after 
him  Telesphoras,  who  also  endured  a  most  glorious  martyrdom  ;  then 
Hyginus,  afterwards  Pius,  and  after  him  again  Anicetus.  But  when 
fifiier  had  succeeded  Anicetus,  now  in  the  twelfth  place  from  the  apos* 
ties,  Bleutherus  hath  the  episcopate."  There  is  then  the  fullest  mani 
festation  that  one  and  the  same  vivifyinjr  faith  has  been  handnd  down 
in  the  church  and  preserved  to  the  present  day.  I  would  fain  read 
the  rest  of  this  admirable  chapter,  but  enough---here  is  the  volume  to 
which  all  who  are  anxious  for  more  proof  are  invited  to  refer.' 

Tertullian,  a  little  later  says,  confounding  the  heretics  of  his  day— 
"let them  produce  the  origin  of  their  churches,  let  them  display  the 
Biocestion  of  their  bishops,  so  that  the  first  may  appear  to  have  been 
flidniiied  by  an  apostolic  man,  who  persevered  in  their  communion.** 
Lib.  de  praiscrij).  He  then  enumerates  the  pontiffs  from  St.  Peter,  to 
his  own  time  in  the  Roman  see,  and  concludes  by  the  memorable 
words,  **  Let  heretics  exhibit  anr  thing  like  this."  The  evidence 
of  Bmehius  is  also  before  you.  On  this  subject  I  have  one  remark  to 
malie«  which  no  one  in  this  assembly  who  sincerely  desires  to  know 
Ihttmth,  and  of  such  I  trust,  the  number  is  not  small,  will  hear  with 
indiierence.  This  is,  that  in  the  letter  of  Cornelius,  bishop  of  Rome, 
to  Fabiiis,  bishop  of  Antioch  concerning  Novatus,  which  is  given  in 
full  by  EoMbins,  and  is  a  faithful  exhibition  of  the  doctrine,  of  the 
whole  church  at  that  early  period,  there  is  not  a  single  doctrine  or 
isage  mentioned,  which  is  not  taught  and  observed  in  the  Catholic 
ehirch  in  this  very  ci^,  at  this  very  hour.  Is  not  this  an  admirable 
mmi  of  the  apostolicity  of  our  church  1  The  supremacy  of  the  pope 
in  the  supplying  of  vacant  sees,  the  sacraments  of  the  holy  eucharist, 
baptism,  confirmation,  orders,  a  hierarchy,  bishops,  priests,  deacons, 
subdeacons,  acolytes,  exorcists,  readers,  porters,  or  janitors;  asylums 
for  the  needy  and  afflicted— one  bbhop  in  a  Catholic  church ;  the 
light  of  excommunication,  acquiescence  of  other  bishops,  personally 
testified  or  by  letter,  in  the  judgment  of  the  bishop  of  Rome,  &c. 
lee-  &c.  In  the  same  letter  we  see  heretics  pictured  to  the  life,  the 
erroro  and  evil  practices  of  some  modem  sectarians  described  and 
strongly  reprobated,  viz :  the  forcing  of  communicants  to  take  an  oath 
never  to  quits  church  they  have  joined.  This  I  know  tu  have  oooio* 
red  in  Maryland,  and  I  presume  it  is  not  uncommon. 


Mn,  Campbeix  ri»€.i — 


l%ree  o\loek  P,  M. 


The  last  half  hour  of  the  gentleman  was  spent  in  culling  antiquity 
to  find  some  collateral  evidence  in  attempting  to  defend  the  great  point 
of  the  succession  of  pontiffs ;  and  with  what  success  you  have  all  seen. 
His  senstbiitty  on  the  present  occasion  is  truly  gratifying.  His  con- 
duct  here  shows  that  he  perceives  it  to  be  vitaf,  supremely  essential 
to  his  system  to  make  Peter  bishop  of  Rome,  and  to  fix  the  first  twen- 


ty nine  links  in  the  apostolic  chain.  But  the  barrenness  of  ancient 
history  cannot  be  remedied  in  the  nineteenth  century.  He  brought 
forward  one  fragment  of  antiauity  on  the  subject;  and  it  is  the  only 
fragment  on  which  Eusebius  himself  relies.  In  truth  that  fragment, 
the  Latin  version  of  Iremeus,  is  the  only  fragment  of  antiquity  now 
extant,  or  extant  in  the  time  of  Constantine,  from  which  any  thing 
jan  be  gleaned  on  this  subject.  And  he  never  once  says  thai  either 
Paul  or  Peter  separately  or  jointly  were  bishops  tf  the  church  cf  Rome  ! 
And  here  again  I  cannot  suppress  my  astonishment  at  the  choice  of 
the  Romanists; — ^Why  they  did  not  make  Paul  rather  than  Peter 
bishop  of  Rome.  In  the  first  place  he  was  a  bachelor ;  and  that  is 
now  a  most  cardinal  point :  again,  he  informs  us  that "  he  had  the  care 
of  all  the  churches."  He  says,  moreover,  that  he  is  not  behind  the 
chief  of  the  apostles.  This  is  rather  disrespectful  of  pope  Peter ! 
It  could  be  so  easily  proved,  too,  that  he  was  once  at  Rome  (though 
a  prisoner  for  two  full  years.)  Now,  if  he  did  not  plant  the  church 
of  Rome ;  he  certainly  watered  it.  He  labored  more  abundantly  than 
all  the  other  apostles.  Is  it  not  then  ten  fold  more  probable  that 
Paul  rather  than  Peter  was  bishop  of  Rome  1  But  probability  will 
not  do  in  the  case.  We  must  have  the  strongest  evidence :  we  must 
have  contemporary  testimony :  we  cannot  prove  a  fact  by  witnesses 
who  did  not  see  it.  We  require  the  evidence  of  sense.  We  should 
not  believe  the  records  of  Christ's  actions,  even,  unless  we  received 
them  from  eye  and  ear  witnesses.  To  illustrate  the  difficulties  that 
environ  my  ingenious  opponent,  I  will  suppose  a  case  like  the  one  he 
has  to  manage.  Suppose  that  in  the  year  one  thousand,  a  tradition 
had  been  current  that  a  certain  bridge  over  the  river  Tiber  had  been 
built  in  the  time  of  the  apostles,  and  that  Peter  laid  the  corner  stone 
of  the  Roman  abutment.  Some  incredulous  persons  began  then  to  doubt 
of  the  matter,  and  called  upon  those  who  affirmed  that  Peter  laid  that 
stone  to  prove  it.  They  go  to  work.  They  found  very  many  believ- 
ing it  in  the  10th  century;  fewer  in  the  9th,  fewer  in  the  8th,  fewer 
in  the  7th,  till  within  200  years  of  the  time,  they  find  only  one  person 
that  affirms  faith  in  it,  and  with  him  it  is  an  unwritten  tradition,  AH 
record  ceases.  There  is  a  perfect  chasm  of  200  years  without  a  sin- 
gle witness.  Hew  shall  they  throw  a  bridge  over  this  chasm  I 
Where  is  tradition  during  this  period!  Is  there  not  one  voice?  Nor 
ONE.  But  they  say  it  is  only  two  hundred  years !  But  according  to 
all  the  laws  of  mmd  and  society,  these  two  hundred  years  should 
have  the  most  witnesses :  for,  the  nearer  we  approach  any  true  event, 
the  more  numerous  are  the  vouchers  of  its  reality  and  authenticity. 
Therefore  the  total  failure  of  testimony  during  that  period  is  fatal  to 
tlie  credibility  of  the  tradition.  But  they  say,  it  was  traditionary  for 
two  hundred  years:  but  who  can  prove  the  tradition!  It  is  as  hard 
to  prove  this  tradition  as  the  fact !  To  prove  the  existence  of  it  first, 
•nd  then  the  authenticity  of  it  aflerwards,  is  only  rising  from  the  po- 
sitive to  the  superiative  difficulty.  We  can  as  easily  build  a  house  in 
the  air  eighteen  stories  high,  leaving  out  the  two  basement  stories,  as 
prove  the  truth  of  an  event  1800  years  old,  finding  a  chasm  of  200 

J  ears  in  which  there  is  not  one  word  about  it.  The  church  of  Rome 
elieves  many  miracles  of  her  own  on  mere  tradition.  There  is  a  le- 
gend in  Ireland  to  this  day,  commonly  believed,  that  St.  Patrick  1200 
years  agq  Jliterally  sailed  from  that  country  to  Scotiand  on  a  mill  stone. 
Now,  tf  we  trace  this  back  we  shall  find  the  evidence  diminishes 


Ilfi 

no 


IIEBA.TS  ON   TIXM 


witli  eieiy  e^ntarj  until  you  cone  within  two  or  three  centariea  of 
tlie  time  tsaigned.  'Fhen  it  comes  to  a  solitary  indiTidaal,  who  heard 
some  one   say,  that  he  heard  another  one  say,  that  such  a  ono 

I  think  it  would  be  well  to  advert  more  pointedly  to  that  law  of 
mind,  that  the  testimony  of  a  fact  is  always  best  and  strongest  be- 
cause of  the  number  and  opportunity  of  the  witnesses  at  the  tim&,  or 
near  ike  time  it  actually  existed.  For  examjile,  at  this  day,  there  are 
many  biojrraphies  of  Washinirton  and  narratives  of  the  revolutionary 
«rf  BorTLr  or  five  hundred  yeara  hence  there  wUl  be  but  one  Z 
two.  This  is  the  established  order  of  things.  Genuine  evidence 
diminishes  as  we  descend  from,  and  increases  as  we  ascend  tip  to  the 
events,  or  facts  recorded.  All  history  is  poof  of  this.  It  is  a  law 
of  evidence,  and  a  law  of  the  human  mind.  Therefore,  had  Peter 
been  bishop  of  Rome,  we  would, as  we  advanced  upwards  have  found 
muell  more  evidence  of  it  than  in  the  third  and  fourth  centuries.  But 
on  the  subject  of  tradition,  I  will  gratify  my  audience  with  a  few  re« 
marls  from  Du  Pin :  certainly  he  had  no  teuiptation  to  weaken  its  au- 
thority. ,       ,         . 

"Criliciani  it  «  kind  of  torch,  that  lig^hts  and  conducts  us,  in  the  obscure 
IfBGtii  of  antiquity,  by  making  Ui  able  to  distinipiish  truth  from  falsehood,  hi8> 
toiy  from  labte,  and  antiquity  from  novelty.  *Tis  by  this  means,  that  in  our 
tinHt  we  have  disengaged  ourseivea  firom  an  ininite  number  of  very  common 
anmrtitito  which  our  fathers  fell  for  want  of  exaiuining  things  by  the  rules  of 
tni«  crilJRiaiii.  For  'tis  a  surprising  thing  to  consider  how  many  spurious  booki 
W*  iad  in  antiquity ;  nay,  even  in  we  first  ases  of  the  church.  Several  reason! 
MhmI  nien  to  impose  books  upon  the  world,  under  other  men's  names. 

fhl  int  and  most  general,  is,  the  malice  of  heretics;  who,  to  give  the  great- 
er TCpliiition  to  their  heresies,  composed  several  books,  which  they  attributed 
to  persons  of  great  reputation ;  in  which  thej  studiously  spread  their  own  er- 
fors,  that  so  they  mignt  find  a  better  reception,  under  the  protection  of  thetfi 
celebrated  names.  And  thus  the  first  heretics  devised  false  gospels,  false  acts, 
and  fiiise  epistles  of  the  apostles,  and  their  disciples:  and  thus  tnose  that  came 
•fief  then  published  several  spurious  books,  as  if  tbey  had  been  written  by  or 
tilodom  autliors,  that  so  they  might  inaensibly  convey  their  errors  into  the  minda 
of  their  readers,  without  their  perceiving  the  cheat. 

Ihe  second  resMon  that  incUned  people  to  favor  books  under  other  mea*i 
names,  is  directly  contrary  to  the  first;  bein^  occasioned  by  the  indiscreet  piety 
of  some  persons,  who  thought  they  did  the  church  considerable  service  in  lorg* 
Im  ecclesiastical  or  profane  monuments  in  favor  of  religion  and  the  truth.  And 
this  idea  prevailed  with  some  ancient  christians  to  forge  some  testimonies  in  be- 
half of  the  christian  religion,  under  the  name  of  the  SUjltt  Mercurias  Tris- 
aiifitfiit,  and  divers  others:  and  likewise  induced  the  Catholics  to  compose 
aoiiMl  books,  that  they  might  refute  the  heretics  of  their  own  times  with  the 
|rcale«t  ease.  And  lastly:  the  sane  motion  carried  the  Catholics  so  &r,  as  to 
tnaeitiy&lss  kUtories^mbe  mtrecles,  tmdjkdit  Unu  ^  the  taints^  to  keqp  ty  th§ 

•  ••••••••••#•• 

Tho  third  reason  of  the  for|^ry  of  some  books,  keeps  a  middle  way  between 
thoM  we  have  alrrady  mentioned ;  for  there  have  been  some  persons  in  the 
world,  that  have  been  guilty  of  this  imposture,  without  any  other  design,  than 
to  divert  themselves  at  the  expense  of  their  readers,  and  to  try  how  nearly  they 
could  imitate  the  style  of  other  men.  Hence  it  is,  that  some  anthors  havecom- 
poted  treatises  under  St.  Owrwin;*,  St.  Jtmhrose'B  and  5/.  Austin's  names — 
•  •  •  •  •  desiring  rather  (as  the  Abbot  of  Billi  says,)  to  ap- 
pear abioad,and  be  esteemed  under  other  men's  names  than  to  continue  despis 
ed.  and  be  buried  in  darkness^y  writing  in  their  own.  And  these  are  the  rea* 
soils  that  may  have  occasioned  the  forgery  of  books:  malice,  indiscreet  piety 
•lid  the  humors  of  men. 

Bat  be>iit:s  these  reasons  that  have  advanced  this  trade  of  forgery,  there  are 


BOMAir  i;athomc  kwjgion. 


119 


I 


aevet^l  ©thwi  that  have  occasioned  the  setting  authors'  names  to  several  booka, 

"^  Tii  terj  rdle'^o  conclude  that  such  a  book  is  «P»"0"-;  beaiujje  U  mndb- 
es  us.  and  afterwards  to  starch  for  reasons  why  it  may  be  thought  so.       [fw- 

'""We  select  only  one  of  all  these  judicious  and  weighty  remarks, 
from  one  of  the  most  learned  of  Roman  Catholics,  viz.  ^^  that  ihe  Catk^ 
oUcs  thtmselvet  have  iitvented  false  histories,  false  miracles,  and 
rALSE  LIVES  OF  THE  SAINTS,"  to  promote  piety  in  their  own  membem, 
from  which  I  emphalicallv  ask  the  question:  What  u  ^ /'f''\% 
faith  worth  which  is  founded  alone  upon  the  tradtttons  of  that  church  .^. 
1  will  only  add,  these  are  the  words  of  Du  Pm,  a  learned  and  authen- 
tic  ecclesiastical  historian,  whose  work  is  published  by  the  authonty 
of  the  learned  doctors  of  the  Sorbonne. 

I  have,  let  me  now  add,  strong  suspicions  of  the,  authenticity  of 
that  passage  of  Iremeus.  The  Greek  original  m  the  first  plawj  is 
lost:  and  in  the  second  place  the  Latin  translaUon  was  not  found  for 
some  hundreds  of  years  afterwards.  In  the  third  place,  two  things 
asserted  by  IrenKus  are  not  true:  1st,  that  Peter  and  Paul  founded 
the  Roman  church;  whereas  it  has  been  shown  by  Paul  s  letter  Ui 
the  Romans,  not  to  have  been  the  case.  2d.  This  same  Irenaus  says, 
that  Polycarp  was  ordained  by  the  apostles,  when  according  to  Poly- 
carp  himself,  he  was  not  ordained  till  the  year  97,  when  all  the  apos- 
ties  were  dead  save  John,  and  there  is  no  document  to  prove  thai  even 
John  lived  till  that  time.    Thus  dispose  we  of  Boman  tradtttom. 

The  ffentieman  first  introduced  this  authority  which  I  have  in  my 
hand-an  Episcopalian  doctor— one  of  the  most  learned  authors  of  the 

pre.8ent  day,  George  Waddington-"  History  «f  ^t»«  P^**"'*;** 'L  «t» 
'This  author  enumerates  the  bishops  of  Rome;  but  listen  to  his  own 
candid  testimony.     In  his  chronological  table  of  eminent  men,  and  of 

the  principal  councils,  he  says :  ,  ,^     -,      .-       r  *i   •  .— 

"  The  succession  of  the  earliest  Bishops  of  Rome  and  the  duration  of  their  go 
vernment.  are  invoked  in  inexplicable  confusion."  r-^-- 

But  I  have  here  before  me  the  Romanorum  Ponitfiewn  Index)— ^ 
chronological  index  of  the  Roman  pontiflfs,  prefixed  to  Eusebius.  1 
have  compared  it  for  the  first  two  centuries  with  Eusebius  and  some 
of  the  primitive  fathers,  on  whose  authority  it  partially  rests,  and  I  can 
tay  with  confidence  there  is  no  faith  can  be  reposed  m  it.  I  find  the 
authorities  on  which  its  assertions  rest  sometimes  obscure,  frequent  y 
contradictory,  and  oOen  at  variance  with  other  facts  which  they  assert; 
involving  the  credibility  of  the  whole  story  of  the  successions  froin 
different  chairs.  There  are  the  following  traditions  to  »>f  f ^"fcted 
from  Eusebius  and  his  fatiiers  for  only  the  first  five  links  of  this  chain 


l#f .  Lineag§. 
1.  Peter. 

5.  Linus. 

3.  Cletus. 

4.  Clement. 

6.  Anacletus. 


2nd.  Lineage. 

1.  Linus. 

2.  Anacletus. 

3.  Clement. 

4.  Sixtus. 

5.  Alexander. 


3rcl.  Lintagt. 

1.  Peter. 

2.  Anacletus. 

3.  Clement. 

4.  Alexander. 

5.  Evaristus. 


Aik.  Lineagt, 

1.  Feter. 

2.  Clement. 

3.  Linus. 

4.  Cletus. 

5.  Alexander. 


I  miffht  argue  this  subject  for  hours  and  hours,  but  it  is  not  worth 
it.  I  do  not  like  to  imitate  my  opponent  in  dilating  upon  matter8,wbich, 
whether  true  or  false,  do  not  aflfect  the  points  at  issue  the  weight  of  a  fea- 
ther. But  the  display  we  have  now  made  of  the  beginnmg  of  succes- 
sion, according  to  various  traditions  and  statements,  '«  ««««^P'^^^^^ 
immediate  proof,  and  shows  iiuw  vacant  and  dubious  these  oral  and 


li  i 


19^' 


DEBATE   ON   TlIS 


kUllAN    CATHOLIC    S£LIGIOI>l. 


121 


i  III 


\4  i 


lioinay  tradittona  are.  Is  not  Waddington  justified  in  saying  »*^*f 
maiier  is  imohed  in  inexpHcabk  eonftmon?*'  and  well  it  is  that  saving 
faith  depends  not  upon  such  testimony! 

1  have  said  the  Romanists  ha^e  never  been  unifonn  in  electing  their 
popes.  I  can  show  some  six  or  seven  different  modes  of  filling 
the  chair  of  Peter,  equally  approved  by  the  church  of  different 
ifsa.  The  chair  has  of\en  been  filled  by  bribery,  by  force,  by  the 
bayiNiet,  and  by  all  sorts  of  violence.  It  has  been  filled  bv  men  and 
Doys,  and  by  all  sorts  of  characters.  But  of  this  more  nilly  at  an- 
other time. 

The  gentleman  remarked,  on  Saturday,  that  the  pope  is  not  infalli- 
ble. The  question  was  not  about  the  iwan,  but  the  pope.  I  take  him 
al  bis  word,  and  will  now  prove,  that  neither  the  present  pope  nor  his 
nrwleoessors  are  successors  of  Peter;  because  Peter  was  infallible, 
both  in  doctrine  and  in  discipline.  How,  then,  can  these  fallible 
gentry — these  fallible  popes— be  successors  to  Peter,  in  the  capa- 
city of  officers,  when  they  have  not  ike  grace  of  ofllcef— my  opponent 
himself  being  judge! 

I  shall  now  attempt  continuously  to  show,  that  if  even  Peter  had 
been  placed  by  a  positive  precept  in  the  office  of  vicar  and  head  of  the 
church,  all  the  official  grace  of  such  an  appointment  has  failed  by  the 
various  schisms  in  the  Roman  see.  The  chain  has  been  broken ;  for 
Roman  Catholics  themselves  admit,  at  least,  iweni^two  schisms; 
•enie  count  twenitf^x.  Protestants  can  find  iweniif-nine,  I  have  al- 
ready shown  that  the  AooA  and  the  first  link  must  be  better  secured, 
if  not  welded;  for  Peter  the  hook  and  first  link  has  not  yet  been  fas- 
tened to  the  right  place ;  and  some  of  the  first  links  are  so  entangled 
that  Eusebius,  the  pope,  and  G.  Waddington,  cannot  strengthen  them. 
And  to  quote  the  words  of  J.  Pope,  not  ike  pope,  if  one  link  be  missing, 
**  Tenth  or  ten  thoutandth  breuks  the  ehmin  mUk*.** 

Ah  me !  I  am  jostled  out  of  my  course  again !  The  mention  of 
Eusebius  reminds  me  that  the  bishop  has  quoted  him  against  the  No- 
vatians,  &c.  But  what  avails  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  as  a  teeUtry? 
It  it  quoting  a  Jansenist  against  a  Jesuiw-a  Calvinist  against  an  Ar- 
Biinian— a  Romanist  against  a  Protestant.  Eusebius  speaks  as  a  AtV 
ioriam  and  he  speaks  as  a  9eciaryt  sometimes  Jirian^  perhaps,  some- 
times Trinitarian  f  but  certainly  opposed  to  Novatus  and  his  party. 
It  is  very  hard  for  a  warm  partlian,  in  any  case,  to  state  his  opponent^ 
views  fairly.  I  have  never  yet  heard  any  one  oppose  Calvinism,  or 
Arminianism,  just  precisely  as  it  was.  lliere  is  some  little  difference 
or  other  in  the  most  equitable  hands,  which  the  opposite  party  would 
ot  have  stated  just  so;  and  we  know  how  often  the  menu  of  contro- 
versy rests  upon  these  minute  matters.  Novatus  and  Cornelius  were 
both  elected  bishops  of  Rome,  and  a  controversy  arose  on  their  respec- 
tive claims.  In  the  course  of  the  controversy,  we  learn,  that  it  turned 
on  these  two  points : 

•*  Thmi  Commu*  admitted  those  who  had  hetnmmUy  of  Idolatry  tocommtmion; 
and  Novatus  taiishtthat  the  church  neither  could  nor  ouefatto  admit  those  to  the 
€Oiiiiiinnion  that  had  apottatiicd."    Du  Pin.  Vol.  I.  p.  135. 

Hofatcis  was  the  rival  of  his  friend  Cornelius,  and  he  regards  hlin 
at  an  anti-pone ;  he  is,  indeed,  called  anti-pope  1st.  And,  at  this  day, 
we  oannot  tell  whether  Novatus  or  Cornelius  was  the  successor  of 
!    So  the  first  schism  commenced,  and  we  look  for  the  faithful 


witnesses  against  Roman  assumption  from  that  hour  amongst  the  Re- 
monstrants'—call them  the  Novatians,  Puritans,  or  Protestants. 

The  second  schism  we  ahall  notice  is  that  between  Liberius  and 
Felix,  A.  D.  367. 

**Constantius  beings  enraged  ag^ainst  St.  Athanasius,  as  supposing  him  the  cause 
of  that  enniity  which  his  brother  Constans  had  against  him,  Liberius  as  to  this 
answered  wisely,  you  ought  not,  sir,  to  make  use  of  bishops  to  revenge  vour 
quarrels  ;  for  the  hands  of  ecclesiastics  ought  not  to  be  employed,  but  onfy  to 
bless  and  to  sanctify.  At  last  Constantius  threatened  him  with  banishment ;  *  1 
have  already,'  says  he,  *  bid  adieu  to  my  brethren  at  Rome,  for  the  ecclesiastical 
laws  are  to  be  preferred  before  my  living  there.'  Three  da^s  time  were  given 
him  to  consider  of  it,  and  because  he  did  not  change  his  opinion  in  that  time  he 
was  banished  two  days  after  to  Berea  a  city  of  Thrace.  The  emperor,  the  em- 
press, and  the  eunuch  Eusebius,  offered  huu  money  to  bear  the  exjpenses  of  his 
loumey,  but  he  refused  it,  and  went  away  cheerfully  to  the  place  of  his  banisli- 
nient.  The  clergy  of  Rome  having  lost  their  head,  took  an  oath  to  choose  no- 
body in  the  room  of  Liberius  as  long  as  he  was  alive  ;  but  Constantius,  by  the 
management  of  Epictetus  bishop  of  Centumcellar  in  Italy,  procured  one  Felix  a 
deacon  to  be  ordamed  bishop,  who  was  himself  also  one  of  theni  that  had  sworn 
not  to  choose  a  bishop  in  the  room  of  Liberius  »  •  »  But  Liberius,  who  had 
given  proof  of  so  great  constancy  in  time  of  ueace,  could  not  lon^  endure  the 
tediousness  of  banishment ;  for  before  he  had  been  two  years  in  it,  he  suffer- 
Cfl  himself  to  be  over  persuaded  by  Deniophilus  bishop  of  that  city,  of  which  he 
was  banished,  and  did  not  only  subscribe  the  condemnation  of  St.  Athanasius  ; 
but  he  also  consented  to  an  heretical  confession  of  faith." — Dm  Pin.  Vol.  I.  p.  190. 

Now,  if  we  take  Liberius  for  the  true  pope,  we  must  take  an  Jrian 
head ;  for  it  must  be  acknowledged  that  he  subscribed  the  heretical 
and  Arian  creed  ;  and,  perhaps,  at  this  time  the  majority  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  church  were  Arians ;  but  that  is  not  the  present  inquiry. 

We  shall  now  read  an  account  of  the  third  schism : 

DAHABUB,  BISHOP  OF  ROME. 
•*  After  the  death  of  pope  Liberius,  which  happened  in  the  year  36S,  the  see 
of  Rome  being  vacant  for  some  time,  by  reason  of  the  caballing  of  those  that  pre- 
tended to  fill  it,  Damasus  at  last  was  chosen  by  the  greater  part  of  the  clergy 
and  people,  and  ordained  by  the  bishops.  But  on  the  other  side,  Ursinus, 
or  rather  Ursicinot,  who  was  his  competitor  for  the  popedom,  got  himself 
ordained  by  some  other  bishops  in  the  church  of  Sieinus.  This  contest  caused 
a  great  division  in  the  city  of  Rome,  and  stirred  up  so  great  a  sedition  there  as 
could  hu^ly  be  appeased.  The  two  parties  came  from  words  to  blows,  and 
many  christians  were  killed  in  the  churches  of  Rome  upon  this  quarrel.  Tba 
governor  of  Rome  called  PrcttextuSy  being  desirous  to  allay  the  heat  of  thia 
contention,  sent  Ursiciniis  into  banishment  by  the  emperor's  order:  but  his 
banishme  it  did  not  perfectly  appease  the  quarrel;  for  the  partizans  of  Ursicinus 
assembled  still  in  the  churches  of  which  they  were  possessed,  without  ever  com- 
municating with  Damasus;  and  even  when  the  emperor  had  ordered  that  their 
churches  should  betaken  from  them,  thev  still  keptu])  their  assemblies  without  the 
citv,  10  that  it  was  necessary  at  last  to  arive  them  quite  out  of  Rome.  And  vet  all 
this  did  not  hinder  Ursicinus  from  having  his  secret  associates  in  Italy  and 
at  Rome.  The  bishop  ofPuteoli  called  Florentius,  and  the  bishop  of  Parma  wera 
■lost  sealous  for  his  interests.  They  were  condemned  ia  a  council  held  at  Roma 
in  the  year  372,  and  afterwards  banished  by  the  authority  of  the  emperor.  How- 
ever they  found  means  to  return  into  their  own  country,  and  stirred  up  new 
troubles  there.  They  got  pope  Damasus  to  be  accnsetl  by  one  haae^  a  Jew. 
This  accusation  was  examined  in  a  council  of  bishops  held  at  Rome,  in  the  year 
378.  which  declared  Damasus  innocent  of  the  crime  that  was  laid  to  his  charge. 
This  council  wrote  a  letter  to  the  emperor  Chratian,  praying  him  to  take  some 
order  for  the  peace  of  the  church  of  Rome.  The  emperor  wrote  to  them,  that 
Ursicinus  waa  detained  at  Cologne,  that  he  had  given  order  to  banish  Isaac  in- 
to a  comer  of  Spain,  and  to  force  the  bishops  ofPuteoli  and  Parma,  out  of  their 
country.  This  did  not  binder  Ursicinus  from  returning  into  Italy  in  the  year 
381,  where  bestirred  up  new  tunnilts,and  endeavored  to  pre-engage  the  empe 
ror :  but  the  bishops  ot  //o/y  being  assembled  in  a  council  at  Aquileia,  m  tlia 


123  Mmrrm  on  thk 

fMi-  381,  wrolis  Ml  ftinaftly  to  bim,  tliat  he  banitbed  Ur$ictmi§  foreTcr,  uul  leM 
Mmmmi  in  peaceable  posoetiioii  of  the  tee  of  Rome,  io  whkb  b«C0Dtiiitied  iui> 
til  tbe  jmr  2U."    Dm  Pirn,  F&l  L  p,  226. 227.— [Time  eipired.] 


Jffa^pad  3  o'cloek^  P.  M 
Bishop  Pumcell  riw*— 

Ii  the  2iid.  century  lived  Tertul1ia»-«  priest  in  Africa.  He  showed 
how  dear  was  the  chain  of  tradilion— he  says  distinctly  that  Peter  waa 
bishop  of  Rome.  I  am  goin^  to  quote  another  splendid  passage  from 
Ms  testimony.  But  first  let  me  ask,  how  could  a  massive,  an  enormona 
volpim  like  this  (holding  it  up)  of  which  the  zeal  of  the  early  Christ- 
imt,  baa  made  so  many  copies ;  and  a  portion  of  which,  the  admirable 
Mmlogetic,  or  defence  of  our  Christian  ancestors,  was  addressed  to  the 
Pfefaii  Emperors,  have  been  vitiated !  It  was  spread  over  the  whole 
woridp— it  was  read  with  avidity  by  Christhins  and  heathens.  It  is 
authentic  history  and  based  on  testimony  far  more  credible  than  we 
possess  of  the  genuineness  of  Homer,  or  Horace,  of  Tacitus,  or  Cicero. 
We  could  not  believe  any  fact  of  history,  not  even  our  title  to  our  houses 
and  other  goods  and  chattels,  without  admitting  it  How  else  but  by 
such  records,  do  we  know  with  certainty  of  events  of  which  our  senses 
have  not  taken  cognizance,  of  which  we  have  no  personal  knowledge,  thai 
a  few  years  ago  we  fought  a  hard  battle  with  England  and  gained  our 
ildepiidence  I  That  our  general  was  named  Washington,  and  that  he 
WIS  aided  by  La  Fayette  ?  Comparatively  recent  as  these  events  be,  they 
are  matters  of  tradition '.  and  tradition  is  but  another  name  for  history. 
Admit  my  learned  opponent's  principle,  and  the  world  will  be  turnea 
topsy-turvy.  We  cannot  be  sure  of  any  thing.  I  now  cite  Tertullian; 
and  mark,  I  pray  you,  the  clearness  and  force  of  his  reasoning  in  the 
fdlowiif  syllogism,  for  apo^jtoiical  succession. 

Teftnllian  de  prre»criptioae  adveraus  hsreticos,  lib.  p.  394.  "  If  the  Lord  Jesut 
Ciribt  sent  his  apottle*  to  preach,  no  other  preachers  are  to  be  received  than 
thOM  whom  he  conimissioned  :  for  no  one  knows  the  Father  but  the  Son.  and 
thev  to  whom  the  Son  lath  revealed  him,  nor  is  the  Son  seen  to  have  reveal- 
ed  him  to  any  others  than  the  apostles,  whom  he  sent  to  preach  what  he  reveal- 
ed to  them.  Wow  what  they  preached,  that  is  to  sav,  what  Christ  revealed  to 
them,!  will  here  lay  down  as  a  principle  (hie  prsescnbam)  cannot  be  otherwise 
prevM  than  bv  the  same  chnrchet  which  the  apostles,  themselves,  founded,  by 
preaching  to  them,  themselves,  both  by  word  of  mouth,  as  they  say,  and,  tfter- 
wudttby  their  epistles,  if  this  be  so,  it  is  therefore  plain  that  all  the  doctrine 
which  arrect  with  these  apostolic  churches,  the  matrices  and  originaU  (or  eieni- 
plars)  of  faith,  is  to  be  reputed  true,  as  undoubtedly,  holding  that  which  the 
chnrc:hes  received  from  the  apostles,  the  apostles  from  Christ,  and  Christ  froBl 
God  :  but  that  all  other  doctrine  is  to  be  prejudged  false,  as  teaching  contrari 
Ir  to  the  churches  and  to  the  apostles,  to  Christ  and  to  God.  All,  therefore, 
that  remains  now  to  be  done  is  to  demonstrate  that  the  doctrine  we  preach,  as 
already  explained,  has  been  handed  down  to  us  from  the  apostles,  and  thus  con* 

victall  other  doctrines  of  falsehood "  They,  (the  heretics)  object  that  Peter 

was  reprehended  by  Paul.  Bat  let  those  who  make  this  allegation  shew  that 
Fanl  preached  a  dlnerent  gospel  from  what  Peter  preached  and  the  other  apos- 
Utoa.  If  Peter  was  reprehenijed  for  withdrawing,  through  human  respect,  from 
tntercourae  with  the  Gentiles,  with  whom  he  previously  associated,  this  was  a 
iwit  of  conduct  (conversationis)  not  of  preaching.  He  did  not,  on  this  account, 
preach  a  different  God  from  the  Creator,  a  different  Christ  from  the  son  of  Ma- 
ly,  a  different  hope  from  that  of  the  resurrection — and,  (to  refute  these  here- 
ticit)  I  will  answer  as  it  were  for  Peter,  that  Paul,  himself,  said  that  he  made 
himself,  all  things  to  all  men.  a  Jew  to  the  Jews,  and  no  Jew  to  those  who  were 
m  Jews,  that  he  may  gain  all.  So  that  Paul  reprehended,  under  certain  cir 
eumsciuccs,  in  Peter,  what  he,  himself,  under  certain  circumstances,  did.'* 


SOMAN    CATUOU€    BXU6ION. 


123 


But  I  mi^ht  read  the  whole  book  of  prescriptions  by  TertuliiMi 
against  heretics. 

The  fish  story  again— here  is  Henry's  exposition  of  the  Bible.  The 
principal  meaning,  in  his  view,  is  that  which  I  have  given. 

Could  Paul,  my  friends,  claim  to  be  the  chief  of  the  apostles  1  He 
had  probably  done  more  than  any  man  then  living  against  Christianity, 
until  prostrated  by  anger  and  mercy,  on  the  road  to  Damascus  "  Saul, 
Saul,  why  persecutest  thou  me"  changed  him  from  a  wolf  to  a  lamb, 
from  a  persecutor  to  an  apostle. 

Eusebius  informs  us  that  Panl  of  Samosata,  was  deposed  by  a  coun- 
cil in  consequence  of  the  heresy  introduced  by  him  at  Antioch,  of  which 
a  detailed  account  had  been  rendered  by  the  council  to  Dionysius,  bish- 
op of  Rome.  Paul  being  unwilling  to  leave  the  building  of  the 
church,  "an  appeal  was  made  to  the  emperor  Aurelian,  who  decided 
most  equitably  on  the  business,  ordering  the  building  to  be  given  up 
to  those  whom  the  christian  bishops  of  Rome  and  Italy  should  write." 
Another  Pagan,  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  giving  an  account  of  the 
persecution  raised  by  the  emperor  Constantius  against  the  famous 
patriarch  of  Alexandria  St.  Alhanasius,  tells  us  that  this  emperor 
strove  hard  to  procure  the  condemnation  of  Athanasius  by  Liberius,  on 
aceount  of  the  supreme  authority  enjoyed  by  the  bishops  of  the  Roman 
see."  "  Even  from  the  mouths  of  babes  and  sucklings,"  says  the 
Scriptures,  "  hath  God  made  perfect  praise/*  I  may  observe,  that  he 
has  extorted  testimony  from  Pagan  kings  and  historians,  to  prove  the 
authority  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  throughout  the  Christian  worid. 

My  friend  has  introduced  the  subject  of  unity,  in  connection  with 
tradition.  We  shall  argue  that,  if  he  pleases,  from  the  Bible ;  but  in 
the  mean  time  let  us  hear  Cyprian,  a  bishop  of  Carthage,  in  Africa, 
on  this  subject,  in  the  3d.  century.  I  am  bold  to  say,  you  have  never 
heard  argument  stronger,  illustration  more  apposite,  or  language  more 
beautiful,  than  what  this  father  employs. 

Cyprian,  de  Unitate  Ecclesiae  Catholicae,  p.  181,  and  De  Simplici  Pr«s.  The 
primacy  is  given  to  Peter  that  the  church  and  the  chair  of  Christ  may  be  shewn 
to  be  one.  And  all  the  apostles  and  shepherds,  but  there  is  seen  but  one  flock, 
lied  by  all  the  apostles '  with  unanimous  consent  ;  can  he  who  boldeth  not 
this  unity,  believe  he  holds  the  feith  1  Can  he  who  resisU  and  opposes  the 
church,  who  forsakes  the  chair  of  Peter,  on  which  the  ciiurch  was  founded,  flat- 
ter himself  that  he  is  in  the  church,  while  the  apostle  Paul  teaches  the  same 
thing  and  shews  the  sacrament  of  unity,  saying,  "one  body  and  one  spirit, 
OHK  HOPE  or  your  vocation,  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism,  one 
God.**  Let  no  man  deceive  the  brotherhood  by  a  lie  ;  let  no  man,  by  perfidi- 
ous prevarications  corrupt  the  truth  of  faith  !  The  episcopacy  is  one,  each  se- 
parate part  being  consofidateil  in  one.  The  church  too  is  one,  with  luxuriant 
fertility  extending  her  branchi  s  ihrouehout.  As  there  are  many  rays  of  light, 
but  no  more  than  one  snn,  many  branches,  but  only  one  trunk,  held  fast  in  the 
earth  by  its  tenacioui  root,  many  streams  gushing  from  one  fountain,  but  all 
blended  in  their  source.  Sever  a  ray  from  tlie  sun,  the  unity  of  light  suflera 
no  division  ;  break  a  branch  from  the  tree,  the  broken  branch  will  bud  no  more, 
cut  off"  a  stream  from  the  source,  the  severed  stream  will  dry  up.  So  likewise 
the  church,  irradiated  with  the  light  of  the  Lord,  diff"uses  hei  rays  throughout 
the  universe.  The  light,  however,  which  is  every  where  diffused  is  one,  nor  it 
the  unity  of  the  body  separated.  She  spreads  her  copious  streams,  but  there  is 
one  head,  one  origin,  one  blessed  mother  with  a  numerous  proeeny.  We  are 
her  offspring,  we  are  nourished  with  her  milk,  we  are  animated  with  her  spirit. 
He  can  no  longer  have  God  for  his  fiither,  who  has  not  the  church  for  his  moth- 
er. If  any  one  out  of  the  ark  of  Noe  could  escape,  so  likewise  he  that  is  out 
of  the  clmrch  may  escape.  The  Lord  tayi,  I  and  the  Father  are  one  :  again,  it 
Is  written  of  the  Father,  and  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost:  ••  and  these  three  are  one," 


HBATK  ON  THE 


■Ml  caii  mw  «■«  tnMKiM  thut  the  unity  which  proceedt  from  dirine  ftrength 
SS  miik  i  maintai?«i  by  dif  ine  fwiniiiienti,  can  be  toro  MUiider  tii  the  church 
9mA  destroyed  bj  the  opposition  of  discordant  hearts?  ' 

I  will  now  go  over  the  ground,  my  friend  travelled  tiiw  mom- 
ioff.  He  mid  we  allowed  that  we  had  two  high  priests  on  earth.  I 
proteat  against  the  gentleman's  sayhig  for  me  what  I  have  not  said. 
One  high  Priest  we  have  in  heaven,  God.  He  has  a  vicar  on  eartti, 
the  pope.    But  that  vicar  wields  no  authority  but  from  God. 

1  have,  again,  been  reprehended  for  endeavoring  to  gain  friends  by 
■ipiessing  a  liking  for  the  English  people,  the  Irish,  and  the  Amen- 
MDS.  But,  my  friends,  have  I  done  them  more  than  ju^ce  !  Have  I 
•wen  d4  from  the  troth  1  Have  I  not  said  that  the  Engtist  had  a 
thoiwtnd  faults!— [Time  expired.] 

Jhur  o^ekekf  P.  if. 
.Mb.  Camtokix  rise*— 

Wfe  have  had  a  learned  discussion  on  the  unity  of  the  church.  Wt 
can  sit  and  patiently  hear  ray  opponent  while  he  Ells  up  his  time  by 
leading  the  views  of  the  saints  on  unity  or  any  thing  else  he  may 
deem  ediMng.  But  as  this  is  not  the  business  now  before  us,  we 
■hall  be  glad  he  would  choose  some  other  time  for  it.  On  this  sub- 
ject we  have  no  controversy  at  the  present  time :  and  that  the  church 
should  be  one,  and  that  she  is  one  virtually  and  in  fact,  we  doubt  not. 
All  that  has  been  read  by  my  opponent  on  this  subject  is  wholly  a 
free  will  offering,  instead  of  that  argument  which  the  occasion  demands. 

Was  Peter  ever  bishop  of  Rome!  That  indeed  was  a  question :  but 
is  it  a  standing  question!  How  often  will  my  opponent  recur  to  it 
without  proving  it !  He  says,  indeed,  that  Irenaeus  says  that  he  was : 
Init  I  tmy,  not  a  line  can  be  shown  from  Irenaius  nor  any  other  wntei 
of  the  Erst  two  centuries  affirming  in  so  many  words  ihai  Pettr  wa» 
Mkm  if  Mome!  Let  himlhen  refute  me  at  once,  by  producing  the 
Mitagea.  He  might  have  heard  so.  He  has  produced  Tertullian  as 
tcoi^entator  or  a  retailer  of  tradiUons.  That  you  may  Itnow  some- 
thing  of  Tertullian  as  a  theorist,  and  commentator,  1  will  read  you  bj 
*•¥  of  dlset  a  sample  or  two,  simply  to  show  how  much  these  opi- 
nions are  worth.  He  speaks  very  advantageously  of  custom  and 
tradition,  and  relates  several  remarkable  examples  of  ceremonies  whicfc 
Im  pretends  to  be  derived  from  tradition. 

••To  begin."  says  he,  "with  baptism,  when  wt,  are  ready  to  enter  into  the  wa 
ter,  and  even  before  we  make  onr  protestations  before  the  bishop,  and  in  th« 
chnrcb.  that  we  renounce  the  devil,  all  his  porarw  and  nuiiiiters  :  afterward,  we 
are  plmiged  in  the  water  three  times,  and  they  make  us  answer  to  some  things 
irhlch  are  not  prw:isely  set  down  in  the  gosp^;  after  that  they  make  na  tajte 
Mtlk  and  honey.and  we  bathe  onrseires  every  d;iy.  during  that  whole  weel.  W«i 
raceire  tlie  sacrament  of  the  eucharist,  institute'  by  Jesus  Christ,  when  we  eat, 
■ad  ■■  the  moraine  assemblies  we  do  not  rcceivf  it  but  from  the  hands  of  tirwe 
that  preside  there.  We  offer  yearly  oblations  for  the  dead  in  honor  ot  the  nrnr- 
tpt.  We  believe  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  last  on  a  Sunday  and  to  P«*yto  Goo 
fBMlinf.  From  EmMter  to  Whitsumlide  we  enjoy  the  same  privilege.  We  take 
CiMlcare  not  to  suffer  any  part  of  the  wine  aiid  consecrated  bread  to  mJI  to  the 
SnMwd.  We  often  sign  ourwilves  with  the  sign  of  the  cross.  ^  wtu  demand  a 
Smjbr  iki$*  vrmetkn  iakmptm  tcHfiurt,  wt  emmotjind  oim  (h*re  ;  but  we 
mmk  answer,  that  *«#  /fwJtHim  Omt  haw  established  /Aem,  eu$Um  hut  ai'/Aor***^ 
■JlilM,  lJjyi/i  ha*  niade  them  to  be  observed."  Tertiill.  De  Corona  Militia. 
"'""When  Tertullian  asserts  a  fact,  I  believe :  but  when  he  relates  t 
dreamt  a  guess,  an  opinion,  or  reports  a  tradition,  I  listen  to  him  as 
to  the  speculations  of  a  contemporary.  You  shall  have  it  both  in 
Latin  and  English. 


BOMAN   CATHOIiIO    BELIGION. 


1% 


Age  iam  qui  t oke  curtositatem  meliits  exercert  in  negotio  mlntis  tnfle.  per- 
Curre  eccfesiasapostolicas,  apud  quas  ipsa*  ad  hue  cathedrae  apostolorum  suis  locis 
prsesideatur,  apiid  quas  ipse  autheuticee  lilerse  reciiautur,  senates  vocem,  et 
repraesentantes  faciem  uniuscujusque.  Proxima  est  tibi  Achaia?  Habes  Corinthum. 
Si  non  long«  es  a  Macedonia,  habes  Philippos,  habes  Thessalonicenses.  Si  po- 
tea  in  Asiani  tendere.  habes  Ephesuni.  Si  autem  Italiae  adjacea,  habes  Roman* 
iinde  nobis  quoque  auctoritas  prsesto  est." 

**  Coabe  now,  you  who  are  desirous  more  fully  to  devote  yourselves  to  the  great 
affair  of  your  salvation,  hasten  to  the  apostolic  churehet.  Still  do  the  very 
chairs  of  the  apostles  yet  stand  in  their  own  places :  still  are  their  authentic  Ittttrt 
fecited.  which  sound  forth  their  very  tones,  and  which  faithfully  exhibit  their 
very  cuunteiiances.  If  yon  are  in  Achate,  you  have  Corinth:  if  in  Macedonia,  yon 
have  i'hilippi  and  Thessalonica.  If  you  jouraey  into  Asia,  yon  have  Ephesitt. 
If  Italy  be  your  residence,  you  have  Konie."  &c. 

On  this  precious  excerpt  I  will  only  remark  that  it  fully  proves, 

1.  That  the  authentic  copies  or  autographs  of  the  apostolic  epistles 
were  extant  in  the  time  of  Tertullian,  in  those  chuidies  to  which 
they  were  addressed. — 

2.  That  the  superiority  of  these  churches  named  above  others,  so 
far  as  mlvation  was  concerned,  was,  that  they  had  these  authentic 
epistles  carefully  preserved  and  read.— 

3.  That  as  respected  authority  in  the  ^nd  affair  of  salvation,  in 
the  judgment  of  Tertullian,  Corinth,  Philippi,  Thessalonica,  Ephesus 
and  Rome  were  equal. — Pardon  the  digression.  The  extract  is  worth 
a  volume  in  prostrating  the  arrogant  pretensions  of  Rome. 

One  word  on  the  text,  as  commented  on  by  Matthew  Henry.  I 
have  had  his  work  in  my  library  for  twenty  five  years.  He  is  a  high- 
ly esteemed  practical  commentator  :  but  is  not  ranked  among  eriiics. 
But  ^et  he  decides  nothing  for  my  opponent.  He  admits  that  it  may 
be  either  the  one  or  the  other  explanation.  But  mind  me.  The  Roman 
Catholic  doctrine  requires  the  explanation  **  lovest  thou  me  more  than 
these  love  me  ;'*  because  it  was  on  account  of  a  supremacy  of  love 
over  all  the  apostles,  that  it  claims  for  Peter  the  supremacy.  But 
Henry  admits  that  Christ  may  have  alluded  to  the  nets  and  boats  and 
occupation  of  Peter;  while  he  refers  to  or  says,  "do  you  love  me 
more  than  vour  companions.*'  The  Messiah  never,  indeed,  had  any 
jealousy  of  that  sort.     His  comment  on  John  zxi.  15,  reads : 

"  Lovest  thou  me  more  than  these"?  Better  than  James  or  John  thy  intimate 
friends,  or  Andrew,  thy  own  brother  and  companion?  Those  do  not  love  Christ 
aright,  that  do  not  love  him  better  than  the  best  friend  in  the  world,  and  make 
It  appear,  whenever  they  stand  in  competition,  or,  more  than  these  thirds 
these  boats  and  nets!  Those  only  love  Christ  indeed,  that  love  him  better  than 
all  the  delights  of  sense  and  all  the  occupations  and  profits  of  this  world.  Low- 
est thou  me  more  than  these?  If  so,  leave  them  to  employ  thyself  wholly  in 
feeding  my  flock."     Henry's  Commentary. 

But  I  would  like  to  read  what  this  commentator  says  about  iheroek,' 
MmitiUw  xvi.  18.    **  And  I  say  onto  thee,  that  thou  art  Peter;  and  upon  this 
rock.  I  will  build  my  church;  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it** 

Peter's  confession  contains  that  fundamental  truth,  respecting  the  person  and 
sISces  of  Christ,  upon  which,  as  on  a  rock,  he  would  build  his  church.  Nor 
could  the  powers  of  death  or  the  entrance  into  the  eternal  world,  destroy  the 
hope  of  those  vriio  should  build  on  it.  Nothing  can  be  more  absurd  than  to  sup- 
pose that  Christ  meant  that  the  person  of  Peter  was  the  rocJfc,  on  which  the 
church  should  be  builded ;  except  it  be  the  wild  notion  that  the  bishops  of  Rome 
have  since  substituted  in  his  place!  Their  rock  is  not  as  our  rock,  our  enemies 
themselves  being  judges.  Without  doubt,  Christ  himself  the  rock — and  tried 
foundation  of  the  church,  and  woe  be  to  him  who  attempts  to  lay  any  other,  lb. 

If  then,  Matthew  Henry  is  good  autnority  on  one  point  he  is  good 
n  the  other.  ^ 


136  DEBATE  OH  THE 

BMmp  Otey  of  Tennessee  has  been  unceremonionsly  dragged  intr 
this  controTersy.  He  if  a  gentleman  for  whom  I  entertain  a  Tery 
high  regard :  and  while  we  mffer  on  some  questions,  concerning  dio 
Mtiii  episcopacy,  we  perfectly  agree  on  the  import  of  'i^jw  (HienisJ 
a  priest,  as  applied  to  christians.  He  has  no  idea,  more  than  myself 
of  a  christian  Merus,  or  priest  offering  sacrifices  for  sins  on  earth.  He 
has  not  answered,  indeed,  seven  letters  addressed  to  him  by  myself  on 
liahop  Oiiderdonk*s  tract  on  diocesan  episcopacv :  but  yet  it  is  not 
too  late.    We  expect  one  of  these  bishops  to  rejily  to  them. 

The  Roman  Catholics  alone  contend  that  priests,  by  which  llicjr 
mean  an  order  of  clergy,  can  offer  tacriBce  for  sins.  Nay,  indeed, 
Mr.  Hughes  in  his  controversy  with  Mr.  Breckenridffe,  says,  "  To  offer 
saerifice  is  the  chief  official  business  of  the  priests?'  p.  288.  Hence, 
we  learn  that  even  in  this  enlightened  land  and  19th  century,  there 
are  persons  amongst  us  claiming  the  power  of  making  sin  offerings 
and  expiating  and  forgiving  sins !! 

We  now  resume  the  history  of  schisms  in  the  succession: 

Wt  last  read  yon  the  contentions  and  havoc  of  human  life  on  th« 
■tioeession  of  Damasus.  The  emperor  at  that  time  decided  the  con* 
Iroversy  by  banishing  Ursinus,  and  on  the  decision  of  that  emperor 
now  rests  the  faith  and  salvation  of  the  Roman  church — themselve» 
Mng  judges.  And  yet,  my  learned  opponent,  in  some  of  his  speeches 
albets  to  tell  you  that  emperors  have  nothing  to  do, — no  right  to  in 
titiiPB  in  councils,  or  with  church  officers ;  and  here,  and  on  numer 
««■  Iweasions,  we  find  them  filling  Peter's  chair,  making  vicars  ot 
Christ,  and  heads  for  his  church  I! 

We  cannot  rehearse  all  the  schisms,  and  shall  therefore  give  only 
•  aiiecimen.  We  take  another  instance  of  an  imperial  pope— one  of 
■a  tmperor's  eieation. 

**Afl«!r  the  dcRth  of  pope  Zoiimns,  the  church  of  Rome  was  divided  ftbotit 
the  election  of  his  successor.  The  archdeacon  Eulallus,  who  aspired  to  the 
biabopric  of  Rome,  shut  biiiistlf  up  io  the  church  of  the  Lateran,  with  part  of  the 
people,  tome  priests,  and  some  deacoui,  and  made  them  choose  him  in  Zoziroui* 
room.  On  the  other  side  a  great  number  of  priests,  several  bishops,  and  part 
of  the  people,  beinr  assembled  in  the  church  of  Theodora,  elected  Boni&ce. 
Both  were  ordained ;  Eulalius  was  ordained  by  some  bishops,  among  whom  was 
the  bishop  of  Oslk,  who  used  to  ordain  the  bishop  of  Rome,  liooiface  wai 
likewise  ordained  by  a  great  number  of  bishops,  and  went  to  take  possession  of 
St  Peter**  church. 

Bjwmmthm,  governor  of  Rome,  having  tried  in  vain  to  make  them  agree*  writ 
!•  ih«  iMpMur  Honorius  about  it.  In  his  letter  of  the  S9th  of  December,  418, 
I*  apeakt  ia  Enlarras*  behalf,  and  Judres  Boniface  to  be  in  the  wrong.  The 
Muperor  hdieviog  his  relation,  sent  nim  word  imme<liately  that  he  should 
«xpel  Boniface  and  uphold  Eulalius.  The  governor  having  received  this  order 
— Mbr  Bom/mee  to  acquaint  him  with  it,  but  he  would  not  come  to  him,  so  that 
nmmfnor  sent  to  him  to  ngnify  the  emperor**  order,  and  keot  him  from  re- 
f  kMo  the  city.  The  bishops,  priests,  and  the  people  that  sided  with 
ee,  wrote  imniedbtely  to  the  cnperor  to  entreat  him  that  he  would  order 
hoUJtTEulmUm  and  Bimyi€€  to  go  to  court,  that  their  cause  might  there  be 
Cadged.  To  satisfy  then,  the  emperor  sent  to  Swmmmeku*  an  order  of  30th  of 
lanuary,  419,  signifying  that  he  should  enjoin  iomfaee  and  EtdaHus  to  be  at 
"  about  the  6th  of  February.    Htmnriui  convened  some  bishops  thither 


to  judce  of  their  cause;  and  that  thev  might  not  be  tusDected  of  liavorinr  any 
one  aide,  he  commanded  that  none  of  those  who  had  ordained  either  of  toem, 
•hould  be  a  judge  in  the  case.  The  bisbom  that  were  chosen  to  judge  this 
cause  being  divided,  the  emperor  put  off  the  judgment  till  ^ay,  and  furbade 
JJiiloliii*  and  Bomifmt  to  go  to  Rmu;  and  sent  thither  j^c^tlmct,  bishop  of 
*%olclo,  to  perform  the  Episcopal  functions  during  the  Emst$r  bolydayt ;  ie 


SOMAN   CATHOLIC    BELIGION 


127 


which  time  be  prepared  a  numerous  lynod,  and  invited  the  h«hops  both  of  j3/rM» 
r«^  GaS-  bulNcSaUus  could  not  endure  that  delay,  and  spoiled  his  busmesi 
K^h^moaSence-  for  whether  he  distrusted  his  ri§ht,  or  wbether  he  was  of  a 
Je^.t^"«.Xpe"  be  rl7ned  to  Rome  the  16th  of  Jarc/.,  and  --1^^' ^- «'^^ 
Iherr^otwiLtanding  the  emperor's  orders,  which  obliged  Symmachus  to  use 
tiJL^rtrdrive  him  out  of  Rome;  and  the  emperor  having  been  inforn^d  of 
h  s  Sedienc^e,  w" it^  f>r  no  other  iadgn.ent.  but  causei2?on/«ce  to  be  put 
in  4?ses.ion  m  t'he  beginning  of  Aprif.  419."-D«  An,  ^  '  I^' ^17 

The  Holy  Spirit,  then,  by  the  emperor  HononuM,^  Jrtan,  too 
fif  I  recollect  Vighl)  establishes  a  vicar  for  Christ  m  the  Person  of 

knifacel.    wSat,  says  bishop  Purcell,  ^^'^^'I^Pf^Z* An  tlht- 
Christ's  church  1 !    Once,  then  they  had  a  great  deal  to  do  with  it, 

and  where  is  infallibility  now  1  ..,.,.,„  t,^. j  :„  *»!• 

Next  comes  pope  Symmachus.    Again  the  church's  head  is  the 

fruit  of  bloodshed  and  war.  ....  j    ^  .v       a  ^r  ^u^ 

"After  the  dtath  of  pope  ^nattasius.  which  happened  at  the  end  of  the 
vear  498  here  was  a  fieVcrcontention  in  the  church  ot  Rome  between  Lau- 
iZi^lnTS^machus.  which  of  them  two  was  duly  P---X'°Jea"te;";&- 
machus  who  ias  deacon,  was  chosen,  and  ordained  by  the  far  ^Yas^lTiZl 
but  FtMtvs  a  Roman  Senator,  who  had  promised  the  Kniperor  -^"^j"**"*' J^»} 
hU  «iict  of  agreement  with  the  bishop  of  Rome  «houd  be  8,|ned  procured 
Xin^titole  chosen  and  ordained.*^  This  schism  divided  t^e  church  and 
thJ  dtTof  «om€,  and  the  most  eminent  both  of  the  clergy  and  the  senate  took 
Srt  wth  onrof  these  two  bishops:  but  at  length  both  part.es  arreed  to 
C^t  u^n  KwsTheodoHc  at  Ravenna  for  his  decision  in  the  case,  which  was 
to  Xt  he!hm,ld  continue  bishop  of  Rome,  who  had  been  first  chosen  and 
ihoLu  be  found  to  have  the  far  greater  number  of  voices  for  htm.  Symmacht^ 
bad^eXantageof  Xa«r/n«u,on  both  these  accounts,  and  so  was  confij^edm 

The  possession  of  the  holy  see,  and  he  ordained  ^^ff^^j'",'  »;'«J^P,t-SleT; 
if  we  may  believe  Anastasiits.  At  the  beginning  of  the  next  year  ««  f a"?f  a 
corned  wherein  he  made  a  canon  against  the  ways  of  solicitmff  nuns  voices, 
S  weTe  rn  ul'd  for  obtainiii^  thfpapal  dignit^^ 

ordination  of  Symmachtis.  seeing  hm.  possessed  of  the  hoi v  '^^^f^'"'* i^^^i^J'^^ji 
used  all  their  endeavours  to  turn  huu  out  of  it,  for  which  end  they  cnargea  mm 
wUh  manv  crimes! they  stirred  up  a  part  of  the  people  and  senate  against  him 
7^^nZr^^lZlohepreJnieSio  king  T/reorfoWc,  that  he  would  appomt 
1  dekite  to  Ur  the  cause!^  He  named  Peter  bishop  ot  ^//tnn,  who  dej^sed 
iep^S  from  the  government  of  his  diocese,  and  deprtvec  him  ot  the  F«se««  o^" 
nftE^  church  This  division  was  the  cause  of  so  great  disorders  niRome,  that 
fmm  woXth^yialm^^^^  times  to  blows  and  every  day  P-d"ced JighUng  and 
Srrs:  many  ecclesiastics.were  beaten  to  death,  virgins  ^«;^ .^^M'^^J,^^^^^^^^^^^ 
•wBtr  from  their  habitation,  many  lay-men  were  wounded  or  killed,  insonmcninai 

Sir^.Dd  the.  prevailed  so  far  by  their  importanlty,  that  the  king  WM  satufied 

2hJ^i.^&.nd  both  the  peopl?  .na  the  '^"-'l^J^^X^ZZV^Y^  ' 
fentMted  against  Symmachus,  were  pacified, and  acknowledged  him  tor  pope,   x  « 
'S^  Se  dUc^re-ted  paky.  ,.Urre.„ai„ed,  «•>"  d«w  „o.  wntjng  .g.™ttt« 

tnod  end  .pre«l  their  clomnie.,  forged  •g»'°«' Sr'S«.S^„  "Lt'  ,o^« 
nmimatm  AmuhuUu  obkcied  thenitohim.whichobliged  SwniiuicAwtowntB 
ilSSto^m  for  wToto  vindication;  but  notwithrtanaiog  the*  eSorU  of  on 
li:^l>'XeTj\.«^^  ?<>»'''io.o{\b.hoij  «e  .ntiltW  year  514  where.-- 

"'ift;  cann'ot' find  C&  church  T "  ^''^'^  T^'.^'i'"""' 
church  at  this  time,  we  shall  have  a  hard  task  to  find  her  there ! 

K?i^^tiryr&i;i"^Sot^Pt^oVx"c^^^^^^^^^^^^ 


I 


WWMATM  an  TBM 

fonnerij  om  of  the  depntiai  scot  into  the  east  bj  Hmrmiidm».  Boaifiic« 
itmi  in  the  church  of  Jalias,  wad  Dfoacorat  in  that  of  Coostwitiiie.  But 
lUl  iMt  died  the  IStb  day  of  Kovemher.  Boniface  leein^  hinuelf  left  in  sole 
pfenion  used  his  utmost  endeavors  to  bring  over  thote  who  had  been  of  the 

oliarjnftjr:  Iw  threatened  them  with  an  anathenia,  and  forced  them  to  subacribe. 
lie  CMled  together  the  clergy,  and  condemned  the  memory  of  Dioacomat  accniing 
of  aimony.    He  proceeded  yet  fortber,  and,  aa  if  tt  were  not  enough  for  him 


to  be  secured  of  the  noly  see  for  himself,  be  would  also  appoint  himself  a  sue* 
cosioff,MKl  ha? ing  caU«d  a  aynod,  he  engaged  the  bishops  and  clergy  by  oaih,  and 
nnder  their  hands,  that  thev  should  choose  and  ordain  in  bis  room  the  deacon 
Vtgilius  after  his  death.  This  bein^  against  the  canons,  he  himself  acknowledged 
finblicly  his  fault,  and  burned  the  writing  which  he  extorted  from  them/*  Dn  rin. 
Vol-  I.  p.  542. 

What  an  excellent  head,  trulT,  for  the  church  of  Christ ! 

We  shall  next  see,  that  omer  women  besides  queen  Elizabetht 
wkom  my  opponent  denounces  for  being  head  of  the  English  church, 
Itad  somethiof  to  do  in  pope  manufacturing. — Pope  Sylverius  and 
pop  Tigilius  come  next : 

**The  deacon  Vlj^ilius  remained  at  Constantinople  after  the  death  of  Agapetus, 
mrhii  had  for  a  long-time  aspired  to  the  bishopric,  and  made  use  of  this  occasion 
to  get  himself  nroniotcd  to  it.  He  promised  the  empress,  that  if  she  would 
maka  him  pope  he  would  rtceive  Theodosius*  Authimus,  and  Sevenis  into  his 
commiinion,  and  that  he  would  approve  their  doctrine.  The  empress  not  only 
promiaed  to  make  him  pope,  but  also  offered  him  money  if  he  would  do  what 
she  desired.  Vigilius  having  given  the  empress  all  the  assurances  that  she  could 
wish,  departed  with  a  secret  order  addressed  to  Bellisarius  to  make  him  success- 
fill  ill  his  design.  Viriltus  being  come  into  Italy,  fount)  all  things  well  prepared 
Ibrhim,  the  siege  of  Rome  was  raised  when  he  arrived  there,  but  during  the 
•iage  Silverius  was  suspected  to  hold  correspondence  with  the  Goths,  and  so  he 
tvaa  mideffwi  odious  lor  refusing  expressly  to  accept  the  empress's  proposals  of 
neaif iiy  Aalhimus.  Thus  VigiUus  having  delivered  to  Bellisarius  the  ordex 
whieh  he  brought,  and  having  promiaed  him  two  hundred  pieces  of  gold  over 
and  above  the  seven  hundred  which  he  was  to  give  him,  found  no  great  difficulty 
to  persuade  him  to  drive  away  Silverius.** 

•  •  •  •  • 

*'  This  was  put  in  execution,  he  was  delivered  to  the  guards  of  Vigilius,  and 
he  was  banished  into  the  Isles  of  Pontienna  and  Panctataria,  which  were  ovei 
against  the  mount  Cirrellus.  where  he  died  of  a  fiiniine  in  great  misery,  if  we 
may  believe  Liberatus.  Procopius,  in  his  secret  history,  seems  to  insinuate,  that 
he  was  killed  by  one  named  £ngenius,  a  man  devoted  to  Antonina— the  wife  of 
Bellisarius:  but  what  Procopius  says,  may  be  understood  not  of  the  death  of 
Silt arius,  but  rather  of  his  accusation  or  apprehension." 
•  •  ♦  a  ♦       '^'^a  •  ♦  •  • 

'•Although  Vigilius  was  promoted  to  the  see  of  Rome,  by  a  way  altogether 
wyost,  yet  lie  cootiaued  in  the  possession  of  it  after  the  death  of  Silverios,  and 
!•••  nelinowledgcd  for  a  lawful  pope,  without  proceeding  to  a  new  election,  of 
•f  ■•  conimiing  that  which  had  been  made.  The  conduct  which  he  had  observ- 
ed during  this  pontificate  answered  well  enough  to  its  onhappy  beginning.  He 
had  at  first  approved  the  doctrines  of  Authimus,  and  that  of  the  Acephali,  to  sat- 
isfy the  empress:  but  the  fear  of  being  turned  out  by  the  people  of  Rome,  whom 
he  hatod,  made  him  ouickly  recall  this  approbation;  yet  he  did  not,  by  this, 
gain  the  hearts  of  the  Komaiif .  They  could  not  endure  an  usurper,  who  Laving 
mm  thacaiiae  of  the  death  of  their  kwiul  bishop,  would  aboae  them  also.  Thay 
MCiia«i  ham  also,  of  having  killed  his  secretaiy  with  a  blow  of  his  fist,  and  of 
havini^  whipped  his  sister's  son  till  he  died.  The  empress  who  was  not  satis- 
iad  with  bim  because  he  had  gone  back  from  his  word,  sent  Authimus  to  Rome 
with  an  order  to  bring  him  into  Greece,  and  at  hb  departure  the  people  gave 
him  all  sorts  of  imprecations."    lb.  FaL  J.  pttgt  551. 

We  shall  only  at  this  time  gi¥a  the  details  of  another  eolnmn  o^ 
tie  liistory  of  the  popes  in  the  work  before  m.  It  sp«i]cs  for  itself 
— 4ii]ls  how  all  the  evil  passions  of  human  nature  eo-operated  in  the 

•leetion  and  creation  of  Cbrisfs  vicars. 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


120 


Under  head—"  An  acconnt  of  the  popes,  and  of  the  church  of  Rome,  from  the 
time  of  Sylvester  II.  to  Gregory  VII.  •  After  his  death  there  was  a  schism  in 
the  church  of  Rome,  between -Benerftci  VIII.  son  to  Gre^ry.  the  count  of 
Freicmii,  who  was  first  elected  by  his  father's  interest;  and  one  Gregory,  who 
was  elected  by  some  Romans,  who  outed  Benedict.  He  fled  to  Henry,  king  of 
Germany,  who  immediately  raised  forces,  and  marched  into  Italy  to  re-establish 
him.  As  soon  as  the  king  arrived,  Gregor}-  fled  for  it,  and  Benedict  was  re- 
ceived without  any  opposition.  He  conferred  the  imperial  crown  on  that  prince, 
uid  on  queen  Chunegimda  his  wife.  Benedict  died  in  the  year  1034,  and  some 
authors  say,  that  after  his  death  he  appeared  mounted  on  a  black  horse,  and  that 
he  showed  the  place  where  he  had  deposited  a  treasure,  that  so  it  might  be  dis- 
tributed to  the  poor,  and  that  by  these  alms,  and  the  prayers  of  St.  Odilo,he  was 
delivered  from  the  tormeats  of  the  other  life.  We  have  only  one  Bull  of  bis, 
infavoroftheAbby  of  Cluny."  „  •    u-    r      i  a 

••  The  count  of  Fresratu  that  the  popedom  might  be  stUl  in  his  family,  caused 
his  other  son  to  be  elected  in  the  room  of  Benedict  VIII.  though  he  was  not 
then  in  orders.  He  was  ordained  and  called  John,  which,  according  to  us,  is  the 
firhteenth  of  that  name,  but  according  toothers  the  twentieth.  'Tis  said,  that 
Seme  time  after  this  pope  being  sensible  that  his  election  was  vicious  and  simo- 
niacal,  he  withdrew  into  a  monastery  there  to  suflTer  penance,  and  that  he  forbore 
performing  any  part  of  his  function,  till  such  time  as  he  was  chosen  again  by  tha 

*  •%hn  X VIII.  dying  Novr.  7,  in  the  year  1033.  Alberi  count  of  Frescati, caus- 
ed his  son  to  be  seated  on  St.  Peter's  chair.  He  was  nephew  to  the  two  last 
popes  the  count's  brothers,  and  was  not  above  eighteen  jears  of  age  at  the  most. 
He  changed  his  name  of  Thophylact  into  that  of  Benedict  IX. 

Peter  Darnien,  speaks  of  him  as  a  man  that  lived  very  disorderly,  and  was  vciy 
onworUiy  of  that  dignity  to  which  he  had  been  advanced  by  the  tyranny  of  his 
fether.  However,  he  enjoyed  the  popedom  very  c|uietly  for  ten  years  together; 
but  at  last  the  Romans,  weary  of  bis  abominable  irregalarities,  outed  him,  and 

gut  up  in  his  phice,  the  bishop  of  St.  Sabina,  who  took  upon  him  the  name  of 
ylvesterlll.  He  enjoyed  his  dignity  but  three  months;  for  though  Benedict 
voluntarily  resigned  the  popedom,  yet  he  returned  to  Rome,  and  with  the  assis- 
tance of  Frescati's  party,  drove  out  his  competitor,  and  re-assnmed  the  papal 
chair.  But  being  altogether  uncapable  of  governing  il,  and  having  nothing  mora 
in  his  thoughts  than  the  gratifying  of  his  brutal  appetite,  he  made  a  bargain  about 
the  popedom  with  John  Gracian,  archbishop  of  the  church  of  Rome,  and  made 
it  over  to  him  for  a  sum  of  money,  reserving  to  himself  the  revenues  due  from 
England  to  the  holy  see.  This  Gracian  took  upon  bim  the  name  of  Gregory  VI. 
in  Uie  meantime,  king  Henry,  who  had  succeeded  his  father, Conrad,  in  the  year 
1039,  being  incensetfagainst  Benedict,  who  had  sent  the  imperial  crown  to  the 
king  of  Hungary,  after  ne  had  defeated  that  prince,  resolved  to  march  into  Italy 
to  put  an  end  to  that  schism.  After  he  came  thither  he  caused  these  three  popes 
to  be  deposed  in  several  synods  as  usurpers,  simonists,and  criminals.  Benedict 
fled  for  u  ;  Gregory  VI.  was  apprehended  and  afterwards  banished;  and  Silves- 
ter HI.  was  sent  back  to  his  bishopric  of  St.  Sabina.  He  caased  Suidger,  bishop 
of  Haroberg,  to  be  elected  in  their  stead,  who  took  upon  him  the  name  of  Cle- 
ment II.  and  was  acknowledged  as  lawful  pope  by  ail  the  world.     He  crowned 


papal  chair,  which  he  held  for  eight  months,  notwithstanding  the  emperor  had 
sent  from  Germany  Poppo,  bishop  of  Bresse,  who  was  consecrated  pope  under  the 
title  of  Damasus  II,  but  he  did  not  long  enjoy  that  dienitv,  for  he  died  of  potsoa, 
as  is  supposed,  at  Palestrina,  three  and  twenty  days  after  his  coronation." 

**  It  is  no  wonder  that  these  popes  have  not  left  us  the  least  monument  of  their 
pastoral  vigilance,  either  in  councils  or  by  letters,  since  all  their  care  and  aim 
was  how  to  gratify  their  ambition  and  the  rest  of  their  passions,  without  watch- 
ing over  the  flock' of  Jesus  Christ.*'     Dn  Pin,  vol.  ii.  p.  206. 

Observe,  a  single  count  has  the  controlling  power  of  some  three 
popes  during  this  administration ;  and  may  be  said  to  have  the  church 
under  his  special  management!  Comment  on  such  a  narrative  is  un- 
necessary.^— [Time  expired.] 

if 


DSBATie  0!r  tm 


Baf'pmi  4  o'clock,  F.  M, 

.pmnv  Pimstit.  n§m - 

I  diouM  wmtm  nplyinf  to  the  last  part  of  my  firieiid*s  arf^meiit  tt 

OfWOiliiiioratr  rooiiifet  that  I  thould  follow  him  Uiroafh  all  his  points. 

W«  w«pB  told  the  *oId  Irish  story'  of  St.  Patrick  sailins  oo  a  inill- 

I.    Well,  the  Irish  have  always  been  remarkable  for  telllof  a  good 

';  but  this  is  told  for  them,  and  it  is  not  even  witty,  much  less  has 

/  bearing  on  the  argument.    There  is  not,  I  presume,  one  educated 

CaiholMS  in  the  world  who  believes  a  tale  so  ridiculous.     For  my  own 

Krt,  I  had  never  even  heard  it  before ;  but  I  have  heard  of  a  life  of  St. 
tiiek  and  St.  Bridget,  written  by  some  yoang  Protestant  wag  who  gath- 
«ffwl  togedior  all  the  absurd  stories  he  could  find  and  gave  them  this  name. 
My  friend  must  have  felt  the  want  of  better  arguments  when  he  Intro- 
duced such  a  silly  tale,  at  this  debate,  for  the  purpose  of  weakening 
the  authority  of  the  most  sacred  documents.  I  will  not  call  this  pro- 
ihilf  t  hil  I  must  say,  that,  in  my  opinion,  it  is  indecorous. 

I  hmm  been  eharged  with  eieiting  the  laughter  of  this  audience,  at 
the  expense  of  my  friend ;  this  is  not  my  fault ;  what  alternative  hot 
ridicule  for  the  story  we  have  just  heard  1  It  was  thus  that  Elias 
mocked  the  false  priests  of  Baal,  by  saying,  "  Cry  louder  on  ^our 
fodT— peiadventure  he  sleepeth  and  must  be  awaked."  3d.  Kings 
Iftf  97* 

Admit  my  learned  opponent's  reasoning,  and  yon  cannot  be  sure  that 
tver  there  was  such  a  man  as  Peter :  admit  it,  and  you  cannot  pre- 
tend to  say  that  you  have  had  grandfathers  or  grandmothers,  or  at  least 
that  they  had  had  any  themselves:  you  have  never  seen  them ;  how  then 
can  you  be  sure  they  ever  existed !  Sometimes  forged  notes  get  into 
circulation ;  conclude  with  my  friend,  that  you  may  as  well  part  com- 
fany  at  once  with  the  genuine  notes  jou  may  post^ess,  for  you  can  no 
lim|er  prove  them,  to  any  man's  satisfaction,  to  be  worth  having.  I 
will  go  still  farther:  admit  Mr.  C's  carious  reasoning,  and  you  can 
never  be  sure  that  such  a  personage  as  Jesus  Christ  ef  er  existed,  much 
less  that  he  wrought  miracles  to  prove  the  divinity  of  his  mission ! 
You  did  mot  see  the  miracles ;  the  book  that  records  them  was  written 
long  aHer  they  occurred  ;  and  many  of  the  most  important  portions  of 
this  very  book  were  doubted  of  for  upwards  of  300  years  after  Christ 
even  by  Luther  himself,  in  the  enlightened  I6th  century !  His  author 
Du  Pin,  says  there  were  abundance  of  ialse  gospels,  false  epistles,  false 
acts,  in  the  early  ages.  Mow  iken,  according  tn  his  principles,  can  we 
fte  mtre  of  tJk  muikmiidi^  tf  m  mngk  book  rf  the  Old  or  New  Taiamenif 
mmag  we  have  no  voucher  for  lie  truth  but  the  testimony  of  men  I 
Hen  are  chasms  to  be  bridged,  and  links  in  the  chain  of  scriptural 
testimonv,  to  be  welded,  for  full  300  jears,  ay,  1600  years,  before  the 
various  books  of  scripture  were  collected  together :  and  when  they 
were  collected,  this  collection  was  made  by  men,  who,  he  says,  were 
liable  to  he  mistaken  like  ourselvea;  and  who  knows  to  this  dav  but 
they  were  mistaken !  Such  are  the  horrid  consequences  of  his  illogi* 
cal  reasoning — another  sad  illustration  that,  for  tiie  deserter  from  the 
Catholic  church,  there  is  no  resource  but  to  deny  every  thing,  to  be- 
come a  deist.  I  would  advise  my  friend,  when  he  goes  back  to  Bethany, 
to  prove  in  the  Harbinger  that  such  a  thing  as  the  present  controversy 
never  occurred.  I  am  sure  that  he  can  make  some  people  believe,  all 
ediloritis  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding,  that  it  is  all  a  hoax. 


SOMAir  CATHOLIC   MBLIOION. 


131 


He  gratuitously  mixes  up  the  names  of  the  first  five  or  six  popes.  In 
1  way  unknown  to  antiquity,  whereas  Eusebius,  Opiatus,  Tertullian, 
and  IreuKUS,  digne  perfectly  in  the  enumeration  of  Peter,  Linus,  Anacle- 
tus,  Clement,  Evarisius,  Alexander— and  two  of  these  authors  have 
been  translated  by  Protestants !    The  mixtnre  of  the  books  of  scrip- 
ture  is  for  him  a  far  more  insurmountable  difficulty.    There  was  much 
disputing  for  hundreds  of  years  as  to  the  time  and  place  where  the 
epistles  and  gospels  were  written;  must  we,  therefore,  reject  them 
aUoeetherl     According  to  his   rule  of  reasoning,  we  should  reject 
them :  but,  thank  God,  Catholics  admit  no  such  rule.    A  fevv  discre- 
pancies  about  the  minor  points,  where  there  is  perfect  unanimity  as  to 
the  substance,  only  confirm  our  conviction  of  the  histonan  s  good  faith. 
And  there  is  as  much  indisputable  testimony  of  the  succession  m  the 
chair  of  Peter,  as  there  is  to  prove  any  book  of  scripture  whatsoever.   1 
mieht,  in  facU  say  there  is  more.     1  have  already  nailed  Dupin  to  the 
counter ;  he  .eans  on  a  broken  reed.     He  quotes  St.  Paul,  to  prove  that 
neither  he  nor  Peter  founded  the  church  of  Rome,  whereas  St  Paul 
rays  no  such  thing,  but  only  that  they  should  not  indulge  in  fo^ish 
disputes  about  the  ministers  who  had  preached  to  them  the  word  of 
life,  "I  am  for  Paul,  I  am  for  Apollos,"  but  give  all  glory  to  Uinst 
who  died  for  them.    There  were  christians  at  Rome  before  fc>t.  Petei 
or  St.  Paul  went  thither.    The  Roman  soldiers  who  saw  Christ  cruci- 
fied, and  witnessed  the  prodigies  attending  his  death,  were,  doubtless, 
many  of  them,  as  well  as  the  centurion  who  smote  his  breast,  and  cried 
out  "/rtt/tf  thit  man  was  the  Son  of  God,''  converted  to  Christianity ; 
who,  when  they  returned  home  to  Rome,  related  what  they  had  seen, 
to  their  countrymen,  and  made  others  converts.    The  apostles,  after- 
wards, went  to  Rome  and  founded  the  see.  So  it  was  m  England.  Long 
before  Gregory  sent  St.  Augustin  to  that  country,  there  were  Catholics 
there— even  in  the  days  of  pope  Eleutherius. 

What  was  the  use  of  quoting  Waddington  as  an  anthor  of  infallible 
weight  with  mel     He  could  not  avoid  making  splendid  acknowledg- 
ments to  the  church  of  Rome.    The  truth  was  too  strong  for  him.    But 
if  we  believe  a  man  when  he  testifies  affatmi  himself,  is  that  any  rea- 
son we  should  believe  him  when  he  testifies/or  himself  1     In  fact,  the 
Inexplicable  confusion  of  which  Waddington  speaks,  is  not  to  be  found 
in  any  of  the  historians  I  have  named  and  whose  works  I  have  exhi- 
bited—from which  too  I  have  read  to  this  assembly.    If  any  confusion 
exist,  it  is  with  respect  to  the  time  when  each  succeeded  each,  al- 
thouffh  in  this  respect  the  eariiest  historians  agree,  as  you  have  seen. 
Linus,  Cletus,  (or  Anencletus,)  and  Clement,  are  all  spoken  of  in  the 
epistles  of  St.  Paul.    They  held  a  conspicuous  rank  in  the  church ; 
their  namee  and  services  in  these  high  places  were  often  seen,  and 
hence  could  have  occurred  a  mixture  of  their  names  and  of  the  dates 
of  their  pontificates,  among  now  remote  historians.     But  m  every  case 
of  doubt  as  to  scripture,  or  ecclesiastical  history,  the  tests  of  sound 
criticism  must  be  applied,  and  then  the  sibyls  and  the  Mercunns  Tns- 
meeistus  are  sure  to  go  overboard.     "  Opinionum  commentadelet  rfta, 
•ays  Cicero,  'inaiurx  judicia  confirmatr     Time  exposes  felsehood-- 
mnd  confirms  truth.     What  Cicero  says  time  does,  a  more  respectable 
■front,  the  church,  has  achieved— she  has  selected  the  genuine  books 
oFscripture  and  stamped  forgery  upon  such  $«  J%^«  ?K;"°"f '     "^^ 
•he  not  done  this  where  would  have  been  the  Bible!    There  are  othei 


DIBATB  fy!f  THB 

wif  i  of  detectinf  orroi^Ihi  Pin  hm  toM  yon  of  them.  "A  third  cliw,'' 
says  he,  *•  foigc  for  thpir  dlwrsion/'  Yon  ht¥«  ill  hoard  of  tho  lmt« 
prodigious  humbuff  at  Eieter  Hall,  England.  The  kinjf  suppresses  the 
Orange  lodges.  The  bigots  of  the  nation  rally.  They  invite  a  general 
convention  of  their  brother  bigots  throughout  the  empire ;  t  champion, 
it  was  the  notorious  Dr.  McGhec,  is  invited  from  Ireland.  He  pro* 
fesses  to  have  discovered  a  document  penned  by  the  reigning  ponti^ 
tiMliiddressed  to  the  clergy  of  England  and  Ireland,  that  recommended 
all  the  crimes  that  could  be  thoaght  of  to  be  committed  against  the 
FwHestanls.  The  crowd  is  gathered.  The  conquering  hero  comes.  The 
air  is  vexed  with  the  cries  of  "down  with  the  Catholics,"— " long 
lifetoMcGheeT  He  opens  his  mouth,  but  be  cannot  speak.  His  emo- 
tions overpower  him — some  broken  accents — the  title  of  the  document 
is  lM«fd.  *•  Simpleton,**  says  a  tremulous  voice  from  the  crowd,  "  the 
Kov.  Mr.  Todd,  of  Trinity  college,  Dublin,  forged  and  nublished  that 
document  for  his  own  divermon  and  that  of  his  friends,  jttst  to  see  how 
lie  could  imitate  the  pope's  Latin,  but  never  dreaming  that  any  mat 
of  sense  could  believe  that  he  intended  to  impose  it  on  the  wortd  as  a 
genuine  production  of  the  pope !"  McGhee  was  thunderstruck— the 
meeting  horrified,  and  one  by  one  they  slunk  away  to  their  homes, 
muttering  benedictions  upon  Irish  bull-makers!  This  was  diverting; 
but  the  consequences  of  such  diversions  were  not  always  as  harmless 
to  the  poor  Catholics;  in  fact  they  had  frequently  cost  them  torrents 
of  blood.  The  celebrated  Dr.  Parr,  Dr.  Johnson,  Nix,  Whittaker,  all 
■flee  that  the  Calhoiic  is  the  most  calumniated  society  on  earth. 

My  friend  should  know  that  the  Latin  translation  of  Ircnasus  is  good 
authority,  according  to  the  soundest  rules  of  criticism.    It  was  made 
in  the  lifetime  oflrenasus,  who  wrote  the  preface  to  it  himself;  by 
birth  a  Greek,  he  was  bishop  of  a  Latin  see,  (Ljrons,)  and  he  says 
he  hopes  the  reader  will  excuse  the  roughness  of  his  style,  for  he  had 
been  so  long  among  the  Celtae  that  he  had  lost  the  purity  of  his  native 
tongue.    His  proximity  to  the  apostles  is  proof  of  the  clearness  of 
the  testimony  m  his  day.     Polycarp  was  converted  in  the  year  80— 
and  St.  John  lived  to  the  close  of  the  first  century— so  that  John 
tasght  Polycarp,  and  Polycarp  taught  Irensns.    We  all  know  why 
Jacob  (supplanter,)  Sara  (Lady,)  Isaac,  (laughter,)  Peter,  (a  rock,) 
weie  so  called— was  there  a  reason  for  the  giving  of  these  names  to 
all  but  Peter!    The  reason  my  friend  alleges  m  not  it ;  Peter  was  not 
tlie  first  convert,  it  was  his  brother  brought  him  to  Christ.    John  i. 
41,  48.    The  word  head  is  figurative ;  this  remark  cuts  up  the  web 
©f  sophistry  my  friend  has  spun  around  it    The  pope  is  Peter's  suo- 
•essor  without  being  all  and  every  thing  that  Peter  was,  withontbein|f 
a  fisherman,  a  sworasman,  a  man  of  impolsiveness,  a  martyr.    He 
succeeds  to  all  the  power  necessary  to  ffnlde  the  church.    The  other 
amtlea  were  in^lible,  as  mv  Mend  adraita,  and  yet  their  sucoeseora 
claiiii  mot  to  be  ao,  IndiTidnally ;  it  is  enough  for  every  purpose  of 
good  government  that  they  are  so  when  they  abide  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
entire  church.     Liberius  never  erred  in  faith ;  and  Du  Pin  hiniKelf  la 
proof  of  his  orthodoxy.    He  defended  the  faithful  Athanasiua  against 
Oonatantina  and  the  Arians  his  accusers !    And  vet  Mr.  C.  would 
have  ua  believe  Liberius  an  Arian !    He  preferred,  he  said,  to  go  into 
exile  rather  than  break  the  ecclesiastical  laws  against  his  own  consci- 
ence.   Is  not  this  one  of  the  most  heroic  sayings  recorded  of  popes  I 
The  formula  he  signed  in  exile  atPerea,  in '1  brace,  was  not  heretical. 


SOMAN   CATHOLIC    EMJGION. 


133 


but  wben  this  act  was  abused  by  the  Arians,  Liberius  wept  bitterly 
tieidoknt  interpretation  the 'document  was  made  to^e^- J^« 
c^eiiY  of  Rome  appreciated  the  pontiff's  magnanimity,  they  had  no 
doXof  his  faith;  they  would  have  no  other  pope-Felix,  Uie  crea- 
tLre  of  the  emperor  Constantius,  they  justly  despised ;  and,  as  m 
fv^ry  similar  Instance,  the  righteous  cause  prevailed;  God  was 
stronger  than  the  emperor,  truth  than  error,  bo  did  the  synod  ap- 
-nrove  Damasus.  and  reject  his  rival.  ^      , 

^  mCTw^s  quotid  about  the  Eucharist,  and  P«ye™_f«f  *« 
deadTl  will  show  you  how  his  testimony  is  in  our  feyor.    Talking 
SfCorinth,  Ephesui  and  other  ciUes,  he  says  to  the  inqmrer,  if  you 
wantto  fiid  L  established  doctrine  and  live  near  Connth,  go  to 
C^nA  to  find  U  out;  if  near  Ephesus,  to  Ephesus;  if  near  to  Borne, 
go  to  Rome,  and  so  on.    This' only  proves  that  the  doctnnea^all 
Z«,  places  was  exactly  the  same ;  but  what  is  «»"' W,^"*' f  °*? 
it  Drove  that  all  these  churches  were  equal  in  a"*""'?.  *°  ^'f."'?. ' 
Supp^  a^an  n  New  York  writes  to  me  to  know  what^^Catholic 
Sine  in  any  point  i^I,tell  him  he  must  apply  t" _*f^'''f5Xw 
clergy  of  the  churches  of  New  York  for  'nfofinf' ""vj^^f    n^Z 
from^this  that  I  question  the  preeminent  ay*»"'i  "^  ^""^  .  „?„^//^ 
Drove  any  thins  whatever  1    It  is  so  far  in  our  favor  that  it  proves  o 
C/^mUy}doctrin.-\i}ie  the  unity  of  that  light  which  proceeds 

^Mr'c"  u"Sricken  wTth  the  authority  of  Peter-it  haunts  him  like 
.  sD^Ue'ufr^Sot  Ais  discussion-it  meets  him  at  every  turn  and 
corS^  rf  WrarCSent,_well !    The  Greek  word  n.,u«.  means  rule, 
Sb  aovem  S^well  as  «  feed."   See  Homer,;w»«m.   "  tlci^  Mm 
S'i' thf  :^S;t"p;U^"suaUy  to  Agamemnon  Jeed  my  lamtem^ns 
.11  the  flock,  with  Uie  subordinate  pastors  spread  over  the  universal  toiu. 
The  Iv^ffelUt  Ukes  care  to  toll  Ss.  in  the  parable  of  Uie  temple,  that 
fa  ^^flt  WfeV  *"  Ix^y-   He  explained,  as  St.  John  says,  more 
A^aU  1  bJoTfof -Ihe  whole  world  ^Id  contain,  to  his  d.sc.ples^ 
dSing  the  forty  days  from  his  resurrection  to  his  ascension,  spent,  as 
STSmoture  assures  us,  in  speaking  to  them  of  the  kingdom  of  God, 
M  h^everwhere  called  his^hurcT..    Mr.  C  says  there  's  "o  pnest 
"nc^  Ch7st.    I  pant  it,  in  the  sense  that  the  ^if  P."««„^°'^'h  ^^ 
place  of  Christ,  lerives  his  power  from  Christ.    In  this  sense  Christ 
Lploys  the  priest  as  his  agent,  and  exercises  by,*"" 'Vf  °*"  P"^^ 
hood  10  which  God  the  Father  hath  (Ps.  109)  confirmed  him  by  an  oath 
foTever   Bulin  the  sense  that  no  such  priest  now  exists,  I  cannot  agre^ 
Khi  gentleman,  for  St.  Paul  says,  thirty  years  afterChnst's  ascen- 
sion. «V<I  every  Mgh  priea  taken  from  among  men, «  <>^^P"^f"r^^^ 
inAe  OUngM  t^l  appertain  to  gJ,  that  he  may  offer  up  gifts  and  sacn- 
S^fOTsS    Who  can  have  compassion  on  them  that  are  ignonmt 
Sf  ea!  b^use  he  himself  also  »  compassed  with  ""fi^^i-  apf 
fterXre  he  ought,  as  for  the  peonle  so  also  ^'^'T^  Aa^^^^ 
•ins;  neither  doth  any  man  take  Ae  honor  to  him^l^  but  he  Uiat  is 
ealli^  bv  God  as  Aaron  was."  Heb.  ch.  5,  v.  1,  2,  3,  4.    "oes  not 
S^'tUsPe  apri^thood  distinct  from  the  body  of  chnstians  Jh^rty 
years  ader  Christ,  as  it  exUts  at  present?    Does.  "»' ^t.  Pa"!  ^y> 
We  have  an  altar  of  which  they  cannot  partake  *ho»rveAe  taber- 
nacle«  Heb.  vi.  13,  10.   And  what  was  that  altar  for  but  for  the  sacn 
Jices  which  the  priesta  were  taken  from  among  men  toofferT-[l  ime 
uxpirod.]         jj 


mmATM  OM   THB 


TUSSBAY,  JAKVAmY  ITtHi  Hay^patt  9  o'clock,    J,    M. 


^  I  intend  if  possible«  to  sum  up  this  argument  on  my  second  propo* 
■ition  this  forenoon.  I  could  wish  that  my  friend,  the  bishop  would 
feply  to  me  instead  of  anlicipating  propositions  in  advance,  and  of 
leMting  or  speaking  of  matters  which  are  wholly  irreleTant.  He  ia 
mm  now  occasionally  on  my  first  proposition ;  anon,  on  the  second ; 
and  instantly,  on  subjects  which  we  have  not  agreed  to  debate.  '  He 
talks  about  my  getting  into  thickets  and  circuitous  labyrinths,  with* 
mtt  seeming  to  perceive  that  I  am  in  pursuit  of  him.  He  make^pro* 
positions  and  assertions  for  me  which  I  never  uttered,  and  spends  hit 
time  in  deseanting  upon  his  own  misapprehensions.* 

I  Biiiit  liovever,  intimate  to  him  and  my  audience,  my  purpose  of 
emtiiif  to  respond  to  any  thing  he  may  introduce  not  in  reply  to  my 
■peeislies.  If  I  must  lead  the  way ;  he  must  follow.  I  cannot  be  de- 
Mf  ed  into  all  the  minor  and  remote  points  he  may  originate.  I  must 
go  on  to  sustain  my  propositions,  whether  he  respond  to  them  or  not ; 
and  shall  appropriate  half  an  hour  occasionally  to  such  matters  in  his 
ipeeclies  as  may  call  for  my  notice. 

I  cannot,  therefore  debate  the  priesthood,  or  any  foreign  topic.  But 
as  the  gentleman  has  again  reiterated  the  charge,  */e«d  my  aheep,^^ 
and  seems  to  make  the  whole  merits  of  the  question  depend  on  the 
iMUliiiil  of  the  word  aheepj  I  will  once  more,  and  I  think  only  once 
mote  toVert  to  it.  It  is  universally  admitted  by  Protestants  and  Cath- 
olics, that  it  is  the  duty  of  pastors  to  feed  the  Jlock  of  their  charge. 
If  thene  be  a  common  dutv  iu  the  ministry  of  the  old  and  new  law,  it 
is  this.  But  it  is  essential  to  his  argument  to  make  the  word  nkn^t  8ig>> 
li%inf  tkeep  denote  clergy.  This  is  an  extraordinary  assumption. 
It  would  be  a  waste  of  time  to  argue  against  it.  But  that  you  may 
■ee  itf  tbsurdity,  I  will  read  from  the  Catholic  rersion  a  part  of  tho 
imli  tkmp.  of  John,  substitating  the  bishop^s  definition  for  the  term. 

*•  I]«  that  enti^th  not  by  the  door  into  the  lold  of  the  ckr^^,  but  clirab- 
•Ih  up  lome  other  way,  he  is  a  thief  aiid  a  robber.  But  lie  that  entereth  by  th« 
door,  it  the  pastor  of  the  cUrgu.  To  this  man  the  porter  openeth,  and  the  eUt' 
fy  hear  hit  voice;  aodhecalletli  his  own  cltryy  by  name,  and  leadeth  them  forth. 
Andwhen  he  halh  let  forth  his  own  clergy,  he  ro«>th  before  them,  and  the 
dtmm  iaUmr  Mm,  because  they  know  his  voice,  i  am  the  door  of  the  clergy, 
Arf  low  mmy  soever  have  come  are  thi^res  and  robber*,  but  the  eUrgy  heard 
them  not. 

11th  ve«e.  I  am  the  good  pastor.  The  good  pastor  giveth  his  life  for  his 
cicf^.  But  the  hireling  and  be  that  is  not  llie  pastor,  whose  own  the  elergw 
•re  not.  seeththe  wolf  coming,  and  leaveth  the  cjergr  and  fleeth;  and  the  wolf 
imMth  and  disperseth  the  eUrry.  And  the  hireling  liceth  because  he  ia  a 
MMiiag;  and  he  hath  no  care  of  the  clergy,  I  am  the  good  pastor,  and  I  know 
nilBe,  and  mine  know  me.  As  the  Father  knoweth  me,  and  Iknow  the  Father; 
aadl  yield  my  Ufe  for  niy  cUrgy.  And  other  clergy  I  have  that  are  not  of  this  fold." 
iMUiiiilt  this  without  comment  to  the  good  sense  of  my  audience. 
Tli«  gentleman  may  find  it  more  to  his  account,  or  he  is  more  ao- 
«ftomed  to  speak  to  the  prejudices  of  that  part  of  the  community 

•  The  other  day  the  bishop  asserted  that  /  affirmed^  the  aposllet  wrote  only  to 
Grt^  eUiti,*  This  is  not  found  k  my  speeches;  for  it  is  so  gross  an  error  that 
I  Milld  nut  have  uttered  it,  even  in  a  dream.  I  request  the  reader  to  examine 
my  inee&het  £or  my  own  assertions;  for  he  will  frequently  find  the  bishop  in* 
■tead  of  meeting  his  opponent,  demeliibing  men  of  straw  of  his  own  cieation. 


BOXAN    CATHOLIC    RELIUION. 


135 


who  rely  on  the  authority  of  the  Roman  church  without  askmg  ques- 
Uons,  who  are  told  not  to  think  or  reason  for  themselves;  but  to  be- 
Ueve  in  the  c*«rcA— to  them  he  may  hold  up  his  map  triumphantly. 
The  face  of  Tertullian  or  Irenaeus  on  paper  is  as  good  to  them  as  ten 
armiments.  But  I  speak  to  Protestants  as  well  as  Catholics;  and. 
therefore,  I  must  reason,  for  they  are  a  reasoning  population.  1  ex- 
pect them  to  d  jcide  by  evidence,  and  not  by  authority. 

Reference  has  been  made  to  Waddington,  on  the  papal  succession. 
His  words  were  not  correctly  quoted  by  the  gentleman.  Bts  interpre- 
tation is  rather  an  evasion  of  the  question.  It  is  to  the  succession  lU 
self  he  alludes.  He  cannot  make  it  out:  he  acknowledges  he  can^ 
not;  nor  can  any  living  man.  ,     .„        ,     ^  __  . 

To  resume  the  history  of  the  schisms.    I  will  read  a  few  extracts 
tiiat  I  have  marked  in  a  chronological  table  of  tiie  popes,  which  wiU 
exhibit  a  bird's  eye  glance  of  the  fortunes  of  the  Roman  see,  for  lit- 
tle more  than  a  single  century. 
12U1.    Alfcxaader  IV.  dies  June  a4.    The  holy  see  vacant  3  months  and  3  days. 

The  cardinals  who  proceeded  to  the  election,  not  being  able  to  pitch  on  one 

among  themselves,  chose  Francb,  patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  who  lakes  upon 

him  the  name  of  Urban  IV.  and  is  consecrated  Sept.  4. 
1965.    After  a  vacancy  of  four  months,  cardinal  Guy .  the  Gross,  born  in  Provence, 

b  elected  pope.  Feb.  5.  and  consecrated  Maich  18,  under  the  name  ot  Lie- 

1268.  Clement  IV.  dies  Oct.  29.  The  holy  see  lies  vacant  for  two  years,  nina 
months,  and  two  days.  ^        ^   ,  ,  :..• 

1271.  The  cardinals  after  a  long  debate  on  Sept.  1.  by  way  of  conipromisal 
elected  Thibald,  arch  deacon  of  Liege,  native  of  Placeniia,  who  was  then  at 

1876.  Vrero'ry  X.  dies  Jan.  10.  Peter  of  Tarentaise.  cardinal  bishop  of  Ostia,  is 
elected  the  21  st.  under  Uie  name  of  Innocent  V.  After  his  death,  which 
happened  June  Uie  2d.  cardinal  Ottobon,  a  Genoese,  is  elected  in  his  place, 
July  the  12th,  and  takes  upon  him  the  name  of  Adrian  V.  He  die»  at  V  itcr- 
bo.  Aug.  18.  witiiout  having  been  consecrated.  Twenty-five  days  alter, 
cardinal  John  Peter,  the  son  of  J  ulian,  a  Portuguese,  is  elected  and  consecra- 
ted, Sept.  15.  under  the  name  of  John  XXI.  r  17*— 1,« 

1277.  John  XXI.  is  crushed  by  the  faU  of  tiie  ceiling  of  the  palace  of  Viterto, 
and  dies  May  tlie  20th.  Nov.  25,  John  Cojestan  is  elected,  and  takes  the 
name  of  Nicholas  III.  and  consecrated  Dec.  26. 

1280.     Nicholas  dies  Aug.  22.    The  holy  see  is  vacant  six  months. 

1287.    Honorius  IV.  dies  on  April  5.    The  holy  see  vacant  till  April  of  the  next 

1292^ ^Nicholas  dies  on  April  4.    The  holy  see  vacant  two  years  three  montht 
1304^"  ThTdeYth  of  Benedict  July  8.    The  holy  see  remained  vacant  till  the 

iW.'*  Clem  Jit  y.  is  chosen  pope  June  6.    He  is  crowned  at  Lyons  Nov.  11. 

and  resides  in  France.  ...  ..  l 

1828.    Lewis  of  Bavaria  causes  Michael  Corbario  to  be  chosen  Mti-pope,  who 

takes  the  name  of  Nicholas  V.  and  u  enthroned  May  12.    He  was  driven 

Ws!*" Grego^  XI  "Sed  March  27th.  The  cardinals  entered  the  conclaveiat 
Rome.  April  7th.  The  Romans  required  a  Roman  or  an  Italian  pope.  Fhm 
arch-bishop  of  Paris  is  chosen  in  a  tumultuous  manner.  April  9th,and  crowned 
the  17th.  under  the  name  of  Urban  VI.  The  cardinals  fly  into  Anarnia  m 
May.  and  protest  against  the  election  of  Urban.  They  came  to  Rondi 
Aueust  the^th.  enter  the  concUve.  and  chose.  September  20th.  the  cardi- 
nal of  Geneva,  who  took  the  name  of  Clement  VII.  which  caused  a  schism 

in  the  church.  .   .  . 

1379.  Clement  VIIL  flies  to  Naples,  and  from  thence  goes  to  Avignon,  whera 
he  arrived  June  10.  The  competitors  for  the  papa :y  condemn  one  another. 
Du  Pin.—Fol.  ii. . 


ini 


DSBATB   ON    TME 


Tondiiiig  all  that  the  gentleman  hat  said  or  may  say  of  the  anthen* 
tkity  of  Du  Pin,  I  observe  that  the  reportera  have  recorded  my  de« 
fence  of  his  reputation.  They  wilt  alao  have  stated  the  fact  that  I 
only  quote  him  as  authentic  on  such  matters  as  all  other  historians  tes- 
tify.   I  will  not  then  repeat  the  same  defence  a^in  and  again. 

I  know,  indeed,  that  what  is  authentic  with  Jansenists  may  bo  he- 
terodox with  Jesuits,  and  vice  versa.  When  the  Romanists  are 
iaid  pressed,  they  have  no  English  authentic  historians.  And  when 
we  quote  a  Latin  one,  we  are  sure  to  err  in  tbo  translation.  Bellar- 
mine  is  repudiated  by  one  party ;  even  fiarronius  is  sometimes  disal- 
lowed. Still  being  in  Latin,  he  is  more  authentic  than  any  other. 
We  shall  therefore  take  from  him  a  few  words  in  confirmation  of  what 
we  read  from  the  Decretals  of  Du  Pin.  Barrottius,vol.  vi.  p.  562,  A.  D. 
498,  tells  us  that  the  emperor^s  faction  sustained  the  election  of  Lauren* 
tius  to  the  papacy.  In  this  struggle  "  murders,  robberies  and  numberless 
evils,  were  perpetrated  at  Rome."  Nay  such  were  the  horrible  scenes 
iiat,  says  Barroniua,  **  there  was  a  risk  of  their  destroying  the  whole 
eity."  In  the  schism  between  popes  Sylverius  and  Vigilius  in  the 
■iiOli  oentury,  the  latter,  though  an  atrociously  wicked  man,  "  impli- 
eiled,**  says  Barronius,  "  in  so  many  crimes"  that  all  virtuous  men 
opposed  him,  was  raised  to  the  papal  chair.  Yet  this  man  was  pro- 
nounced a  good  pope.  Barronius  says  he  is  not  to  be  despised  though 
a  bad  man.  Let  every  man  recollect,  "says  he,  that  even  to  the  sha- 
dow of  Peter,  immense  virtue  was  given  of  God!*'  (Bar.  vol.  vii. 
p.  4S§.) 

*Im  the  midst  of  contentions  which  rent  the  Roman  Catholic  church, 
pope  Pelagiuj  I.  was  chosen.  This  pope  approved  the  council  which 
|Mipe  Yigiuus  had  condemned.  This  increased  the  flames  of  eccle- 
siastical war  to  such  a  degree  that  the  pope  could  not  find  a  bishup  of 
Rome,  vim  could  consecrate  htm ;  and  he  was  constrained  to  beg  a 
biahopof  Ostium  to  do  this  service ;  **  a  thing,"  says  Barronius,  *«which 
mmei  had  occurred  before."    (Vol.  vii.  p.  475.) 

The  popes  Formosus  and  Stephen  lived  in  the  ninth  century.  The 
latter,  says  Barronius,  was  so  wicked,  tbat  he  would  not  have  dared 
lo  enroll  him  in  the  list  of  popes,  were  it  not  that  antiquity  gives  his 
name.  In  the  exercise  of  papal  infallibility,  he  not  only  rescinded 
tlie  oelf  and  decree$  of  his  infallible  predecessor  Formosus;  but  collec- 
tiilff  a  council  of  cardinals  and  bishops  as  bad  as  himself,  he  actually 
had  the  old  pope  taken  out  of  his  grave;  and  he  brought  him  into 
court,  tried,  and  condemned  him;  cut  off  three  of  his  fingers;  and 
Dlimged  his  remains  into  the  Hber.  See  Platina's  life  of  Stephen 
¥1.  and  Barronius  do.' 

*Barronius  under  the  year  1004,  names  three  rival  popes,  who  per- 
petrated the  most  shameful  crimes,  and  bartered  the  napacy,  and  sold 
It  for  gold.  He,  though  a  Roman  Catholic  writer,  calls  them  Cerber* 
11,  tlM  throe  headed  beast  which  had  iwued  lirom  the  gates  of 
Imll  !• 

iii»r  his  words  in  his  life  of  pope  Stephen  VII.  A.  D.  900.  •  The 
MM  it  ■loh,  that  scarcely  anv  one  can  believe  it,  unless  he  sees  il 
with  Ms  eyes,  and  handles  it  with  his  hands,  viz.  what  unworthy, 
vile,  nnsi|htly,  yea,  execrable  and  hateful  things  the  sacred  apostolic 
■ee^  on  whose  hmges  the  universal  apostolical  church  turns,  has  been 
•ompelled  to  see,  &c.* 

*  Geubrard  in  his  chronicles,  under  the  year  904  says,  **  for  nearly 


SOMilN  CATHOLIC    BKLI6I0N. 


13f 


1 50  years,  about  fifty  popes  deserted  wholly  the  virtue  of  their  predeeeti* 
sots,  being  apootatb  rather  than  ArosroLicAL !' 

*  And  to  crown  the  climax,  Barronius,  under  the  year  919  adds : 
*»  Whal  is  then  the  face  of  the  holy  Roman  church !  How  exceed- 
ingly foul  it  is !  When  most  potent,  sordid  and  abandoned  women, 
(Meretices,)  ruled  at  Rome:  at  whose  will  the  sees  were  changed; 
bishops  vere  presented ;  and  what  is  horrid  to  hear,  and  unutterable. 
False  Po^ tiffs,  the  paramours  of  these  women,  were  intruded  into 
the  chair  ot  St.  Peter,  &c."  He  adds,—**  For  who  can  affirm  that 
men  illegally  intruded  by  bad  women,  (scortis)  were  Roman  pontiffs !" 
Again :  ♦*  The  canons  were  closed  in  silence ;  the  decrees  of  pontiffs 
were  suppressed :  the  ancient  traditions  were  proscribed ;  and  the  sac 
cred  ceremonies  and  usages  of  former  days  were  whollt  extihct. 
See  his  Annals  A.  D.  912.'* 

Again :  he  relates  that  pope  Alexander  was  elected  by  cardinals, 
some  of  whom  were  bribed,  some  allured  by  promises  of  promotion, 
and  some  enticed  by  fellowship  in  his  vices  and  impurities  to  ^ve 
him  their  suffrages.  He  refers  to  various  authors  who  complained 
that  he  was  famous  for  his  debauchery ;  he  tells  us  of  his  vile  exam- 
ple in  keeping  a  Roman  strumpet  Vanozia,  by  whom  he  had  many 
children ;  that  he  conferred  wealth  and  honors  on  them,  and  even  cre- 
ated one  of  them,  Cajsar  Boipa  (an  inordinately  wicked  man)  arch- 
bishop of  the  church.    Vid.  Bar.  Annals,  vol.  xix.  p.  413  et  seq. 

'The  same  writer  (vol.  ix.  p.  145)  records  the  election  of  Bene- 
dict IX.  at  the  age  of  twelve  years,  which  he  says  was  accom- 
plished by  gold,  and  he  calls  it  ("  horrendum  ac  detestabile  visu") 
"horrible  and  detestable  to  behold  ;"*  and  jret  he  adds  that  the  whole 
christian  world  acknowledged  Benedict,  without  controversy,  to  be  a 

true  pope ! 

Stcpmen  vn.  The  anparalteled  irickedneM  of  this  pope  it  cooTejed  in  a  sin- 
gle line  :  [Ita  quidem  pa$$usfacinorv$  homo  quique  ut/ur  ei  latro  tngretsui  ttt 
m  ovilt ovtttm^  laqueo  vitam  adeo  infami  exitu  vindice  Deo  ctoufif.]  ••  Thus  per- 
ished this  villanoiis  man,  who  entered  the  shet  pfold  as  a  thief  and  a  robber;  and 
who  in  the  retribution  of  God,  ended  his  days  by  the  infamous  death  of  the  hal- 
ter."   (Bar.  vol.  X.  p,  742.) 

Again,  Barronius  says  of  the  lOthoentarr: 

•*  What  then  was  the  face  of  the  Roman  church  ?  How  very  filthr,  when  the 
moat  powerful  and  sordid  harlots  then  ruled  at  Rome,  at  whose  pleasure  seea 
were  changed  and  bishoprics  were  given,  and — which  is  horrible  to  hear,  and 
most  abommable — their  gallants  were  obtruded  into  the  see  of  Peter,  and  made 
faht popes;  for  who  can  say  they  could  be  lawful  popes,  who  were  intruded  by 
such  harlots  without  law  ?  There  was  no  mention  of  the  election  or  consent 
of  clergy;  the  canons  were  silent,  the  decrees  of  popes  suppressed, the  ancieat 
traditions  proscribedg—Iust   armed   with  the  secular    power,  challeogcd  ul 

Ihinrs   to  itseld 

•  »  •  »  »  •  • 

What  kind  of  Cardinals,  do  yon  Imagine  must  then  be  choaen  by  those  mon- 
sters, when  nothing  is  so  natural  as  for  like  to  beget  like  1  who  can  doubt,  but  they 
in  all  things  did  consent  to  those  that  chose  them  ?  Who  will  not  easily  beliere 
that  they  animated  them  and  followed  their  footsteps  ?  Who  understands  not, 
that  such  men  must  wish  that  our  Lord  would  have  slept  continually,  and  never 
have  awoke  to  judgment  to  take  cognizance  of,  and  punish  their  iniquities.'*  Ann. 
Vol.x.91t. 

Now  if  the  gentleman  objects  to  any  of  these  quotations  which  1 
have  hastily,  but  I  believe  most  correctly  made :  the  originals  art 

*  Browule«*s  Letters  on  Row.  Cith.  controversy,  pp.  36,  37,38. 
M  3  18 


'  ■Til II  II       II  —.—i- .J.!^!— ^M-MH  .UMtm 


Ji'VW 


'SBMATS  mi  TUB 


iMiii  tnd  let  them  be  exwiiined :  For,  theM  belnf  idmitted  it  is  m 
less  to  object  to  Du  Pin,  who  neror  usee  to  serere  lanfuage  agiinfl 
the  wMiet  at  Baronias  wui  Genebraiid,  Plalinm  and  others. 

ffnallf  on  this  subject  For  mrmtf  years,  there  was  no  pope  in 
Rome,  beridee  all  the  other  interregmrais.  The  pope  resided  at  Ayigr- 
non  in  France  and  left  Sl  Peter's  chair  empty.  For  almoat  half  a 
eentary  there  were  two  popes,  and  two  lines  of  popes  existing  at  one 
time— one  reigning  in  Italy,  and  one  in  France.  And  at  last  there 
were  three  popes— Benedict  XIII.  the  Spanish  pope,  Gregory  XII.  the 
French  pope,  and  John  XXIII.  the  Italian  pope.  Then  the  conncil  of 
Constance  met— A.  D.  1414,  and  raadea  fourth,  or  true  pope,  and  depos- 
ed the  three  anti-popes.  Snch  was  the  29th  schism  in  the  papacy !  Is 
theier-oiay  I  not  ask  with  all  these  facts  before  us,— Is  there  any 
man  on  earth  that  can  have  the  least  confidence  in  any  pope  as  the 
■nceemor  of  Peter!  A  thousand  questions  the  most  learned  and  m- 
tiimtte,  which  no  living  bishop  has  time  or  means  to  examine,  must 
b«  decided  before  he  could  rationally  or  relieiousljr  believe  that  the 
■necesiion  from  Peter  has  any  existence  at  all:  or,  in  truth,  it  cannot 
iMMIeved  but  upon  iiMf«iitilAm7y/  *    :,      j      r 

We  now  proceed  to  show  that  there  has  been  no  fixed  and  nnifonii 
■Mlhod  of  electing  the  popes.  Indeed  history  and  tradition  furnish 
14  with  no  less  than  seven  different  methods. 

1.  Iransus  says,  •that  tradition  said,  that  Peter  appointed  his  sue- 

wmrJ    And  if  he  did,  why  do  not  all  the  popes  follow  his  exam 


plet  for  Irensus  is  as  good  authority  for  this,  as  for  that  concerning 
the  founding  of  the  chureh  of  Rome.  ,       ,    .     -__. 

«.  The  priests  and  people  are  said  to  have  often  elected  the  first 
wipes;  or,  rather  the  btsiiops  nominated  and  the  people  elected.--I 
ought  to  have  observed  disUnctly,  that  there  is  as  much  sophistry  in 
the  word  pmi  ti  evet  wan  played  off  on  earth.  The  word  pope,  m 
the  east  was  firet  applied  to  all  bishops,  and  is  so  used  in  Russia  to 
thin  day.  It  was  in  the  5th  century  applied  to  the  senior  bishops  and 
metropolitans  of  the  wesU  But  it  was  not  until  the  time  of  Gregonr 
VH.  that  it  was  eateAwiWy  appropriakd  hfM»9vm  ifutomHon,  to  Me 
ljil0M  efMome,  ,  . 

Hence,  in  this  ▼arlety  of  acceptation,  popes  many  were  always  in 
the  church,  and  were  elected  by  the  people.  But  the  pereons  firet 
called  popes  and  those  now  wearing  the  title,  have  no  other  resem- 
blance tiian  the  common  name. 

X  The  emperoia  nominated  and  bishops  elected,  and  the  emperora 
'itpiwinlei  en 'their  own  nsponsibility. 

4.  Leo  VIII.  transferred  the  whole  power  of  choosmg  the  pope  to 
iie  emperor,  being  tired  with  the  Inconstancy  of  the  Romans. 

fi.  Iwronius  in  his  Annals.  113,  8,  and  sect  141, 1,  says,  «They 
(the  popes)  were  introduced  by  powerful  men  and  women.  M  wm 
frmmnih  IA0  prke  ofjprmiihmm  /* 

£  By  the  decree  olpope  Nicholas  II.  in  his  L«teran  Synod :  *The 
whole  business  was  given  over  to  the  eafdinals,  an  order  of  men,  not 
heard  of  for  1000  yeare  after  Christ.  The  popes  n-w  make  the 
Mliiials,  and  tiie  cardinals  make  the  pope.  What  a  glonous  repub- 
Ik!  My  friend,  a  staunch  republican,  agrees  that  a  few  men  m 
Rome  should  elect  a  head  for  the  universal  church !  But  sometimes— 

7.  General  councils  (as  that  of  Constance,  Pisa  and  Basil)  took 
upon  tiiemselves  the  nakhif  of  popes,  and,  as  we  have  seen,  made  a 


SOHAN   CATHOLIC    RKLIOION. 


139 


fourth  pope,  when  there  were  already  three  acknowledged  by  different 
parts  of  the  church.    Can  these  facts  be  denied  1    They  camnot  and 

I  preaumcy  will  not.  ,     ,      . 

It  is  now  affirmed  that  the  intrigues  of  papal  elections  incomparaF 
bly  surpass  the  intrigues  of  any  court  on  earth.  The  politics  of 
France,  of  Italy,  of  Austria,  are  so  incorporated  with  the  schemes  of 
tiie  cardinals,  or  so  bias  or  bribe  them,  that  on  the  election  of  a  pope, 
it  is  usually  said,  "  Austria  has  succeeded"  or  "  Spain,"  or  "  France 
has  prevailed  this  time !"  In  one  word,  the  papal  chair  is  tiie  most 
corrupt  and  conupting  institution,  that  ever  stood  on  earth.  The  Ro- 
man Cesars,  or  the  Egyptian  dynasties,  were  pure  and  incorrupt,  coni- 
pared  with  this  mammoth  scheme  of  iniquity.  On  the  whole  premi- 
ses, I  ask,  would  the  head  of  the  church  so  jeopardize  all  the  interests 
of  his  kingdom  as  to  make  the  popes  of  Rome,  or  faith  in  them  es- 
sential elements  of  his  system  of  redemption,  or  necessary  to  the  sal- 
vation of  any  human  being  1 !—  ,       ,      .  .1 

To  recapitulate.— This  being  a  fundamental  and  pnmary  essential 
element  of  the  Roman  church,  I  have  labored  it  more  than  any  other 
and  yet  I  have  not  said  a  tithe  of  what  may  be  said,  or  even  what  I 
have  to  say  on  the  subject.  But  I  have  aimed  at  establishing  four  points 
in  demonstrating  this  proposition.  And  to  adopt  the  positive  and 
dogmatic  style  of  my  learned  opponent,  may  I  not  say  that  /  have 

^TC5;;office  of  pope,  o,  sup«,n.e  head  on  eaxA.  has  no  s^ip- 
tore  warrant  or  authority  whatever.  Indeed,  that  the  whole  heau  ideal 
of  a  church  of  nations,  with  a  monarchical  head,  (which,  in  the  es- 
timation of  tiie  bishop,  is  equivalent  to  the  word  church  of  Christ,)  is  as 
gratuitous  an  assumption  as  ever  graced  a  romance^  ancient  or  modern.^ 

2.  That  it  cannot  be  ascertained  that  Peter  was  ever  bishop  of  Rome 
—nay,  indeed,  it  has  been  shown,  that  it  is  wholly  contrary  to  the 
New  Testament  history,  and  incompatible  with  his  office.— 

3.  That  Christ  gave  no  law  of  succession.— 

4.  That  if  he  had,  tiiat  succession  has  been  destroyed  by  a  long 
continuance  of  the  greatest  monstera  of  crime  that  ever  lived ;  and  by 
cabals,  intrigues,  violence,  envy,  lust,  and  schisms,  so  that  no  man  can 
believe  that  one  drop  of  apostolic  grace  is  either  in  the  person  or  office 
of  Gregory  XVI.  the  present  nominal  incumbent  of  Peter's  chair! 
It  would  be  now  as  easy  to  prove  that  Solomon's  mosque  built  by  the 
Turks,  is  Solomon's  temple,  in  which  Jesus  Christ  stood;  as  that  the 
popes  or  church  of  Rome  is  a  christian  institution.  -       ,    .      1 

On  what,  now,  rests  Roman  Catholicism  1 !  If  the  foundatton  be 
destroyed,  how  can  the  building  stand  1  I  need  not  tell  my  opponent 
that  tiiis  is  a  blow  at  the  root  of  his  apostolic  tree.  He  feels  it,  and 
J  am  glad  to  think  that  if  any  American  bishop  can  sustain  these  pre- 
tensions, my  learned  opponent  is  that  man.  He  has  asked,  and  he 
may  again  ask,  where  was  the  Protestant  church  before  Luther's  time? 
In  reply,  I  ask,  where  was  the  pope  before  Constantine's  timet 
He  brought  Mosheim  to  offset  Waddington  and  Jones  on  the  subject 
of  the  Novatians.  And  what  did  Mosheim  prove  contrary  to  these 
historians  1  You  have  heard  with  what  success  my  opponent  seeks 
to  tarnish  the  reputation  of  Novatians,  Waldenses  and  Protestants. 
As  a  general  offset  to  all  his  declamation  on  this  subject,  I  will  give 
you  the  testimony  of  a  g:ood  Roman  Catholic :  for  he  was  an/w^wm/or 
—I  mean  BUnefim  Saeeho^  one  of  the  most  inveterate  enemies  of 


L4fl 


DKBATS  ON  TllB 


these  old  fasMoned  Protestants.   I  have  tlie  orifftnal  before  me,  hm 
•kail  not  read  it  unless  it  be  required :  The  translation  reads : 

"Among  all  thenscti"  (there  wer«  icct%  you  perceive,  before  the  Reforma- 
tion)  ••  If  hush  ttill  are,  or  have  been,  there  it  not  one  more  permckmi  to  Uie  church 
than  ilMl  of  the  Leonitea;"  (a  name  by  which  the  WaKlenses  were  iometiniet 

"   I,)  •md  that  for  three  rmsons.    The  Itt  la,  becaute  it  is  tJic  oldeat,  for 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    EEL  GION. 


141 


aome  aay  it  hath  exiited  from  the  time  of  pope  S>Wc«t€r;  othen/wm  the  Ifiiw 
of  the  Jpoetlee.  The  2nd,  because  it  is  more  general,  for  there  »  jcofce  any 
country  when  tM*  $€ct  is  not.  The  3rd,  because  wtu  n  all  others  lecta  beget 
horror  by  their  blaaphemies  against  God,  this  of  the  Leonitrshath  a  ^emt  show 
^pmtw  because  thev  MveJMtly  bejbremen,  and  believe  nil  thinffMrtghUjf  cmt,- 
enmi  God  and  all  the  aHtcka  contained  in  the  creed.  Only  they  blas- 
heined  the  church  of  Rome.'*    JRetn.  Sanho,  edit.  GrCzett  0.  S.  J.  etqt.  4. 

I  coiild  five  much  more  Roman  Catholic  testimony  in  proof  that  the 
doctrines  of  Protestantism  continued  from  the  dap  of  the  first  Roman 
schism  till  now :  but  this  at  present  would  seem  superfluous.  Nor 
will  I  speak  now  of  tlie  old  English  and  Irish  churches  which  the 
Roman  bishops  sougrht  in  vain  for  many  centuries  to  bring  into  their 
fold*  There  is  nothing  betrays  a  less  discriminating  regard  to  the 
facts  of  ecclesiastical  history,  than  to  ask  where  was  the  church  be- 
fore the  days  of  Luther  1 — ^But  I  hasten  to  the  point  yet  before  me, 
whidbflike  some  others,  I  may  not  remember,  was  reserved  for  a  more 
eomvenient  season.  It  was  an  objection  drawn  in  part  from  E ph.  iv. 
II,  and  from  the  alleged  difficulty  of  obtaining  a  ministry  hot 
ivongli  the  popes  of  Rome. 

Tliit|iM8age,  viewed  in  common  with  Matth.  xxviii.  18, 19,  seems  to 
me,  rather  to  remove  all  difficulty  on  the  subject.  Matth.  xxviii.  gives 
all  authority  to  the  apostles  to  set  up  the  christian  church,  and  pro- 
niaes  them  miraculous  aid,  till  the  work  was  done.  "  I  am  with  you 
continually  HU  the  conclusion  of  this  sttde^-^  m^  mmu.t^t  tw  «i^wc.  Of 
which  I  must  here  speak  more  particularly.  At  present  it  suffices  to 
lepeat  the  fact  of  such  a  commission,  and  such  a  promise  to  the 

asiistles.  ,  .      ,  .*. 

How  let  ns  hear  Paul.  When  Christ  ascended,  "  he  gwoe  gtps  to 
men."— What,  let  me  ask,  were  they !  "  He  gave  apostles,  prophets, 
evangelists,  pastors,  and  teachers" — all  miraculously  endowed.  They 
were'^not  raised  up,  out  of  the  church ;  but  given  directly  from  heaven 
to  the  church,  or  for  building  a  church !  What,  again,  let  me  ask 
. Paul,  were  they  given  fori  "  For  the  perfecting  of  the  saints:  or, 
according  to  the  Douay  bible,  "for  the  consummation  of  the  saint* 
unto  Ihe  work  of  the  ministry,  unto  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ. 
And  for  how  long,  let  me  ask,  still  more  empnatically  !  "  Until  (it 
is  Mj;t«  in  Greek,  dome  in  Latin,  adverbs  expressive  of  the  time  how 
long)  "  Until  we  all  come  into  the  unity  of  the  faith  and  knowledge 
of  3ie  Son  of  God,  to  a  perfect  OTan"  (not  men— that  is,  to  a  perfect 
body)  «'  into  the  measure  of  the  age  of  the  fulness  of  Christ." — ^The 
Roman  church  beingjudge,  then,  these  officers  were  given  to  the  church 
allvr  the  ascension,  for  a  special  work,  and  for  a  limited  time. — ^1^11, 
out  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  they  had  made  one  ptarKcr  up,  or  church. 

Now,  these  apostles  acted  in  exact  accordance  with  the  nature  of 
the  case.  They  preached,  baptised,  and  congregated  disciples,  in 
particular  places.  These  disciples  had,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
to  receive  from  them  the  whole  christian  institution.  They  knew 
neither  what  to  believe  or  do,  but  as  they  were  taueht  by  these  Ib- 
■pired  men.— Hence,  the  apostles  preached,  baptized,  taught,  served 


tables,  and  dispensed  all  ordinances,  and  performed  all  offices  amonf 
them,  till  the  body  of  the  church  had  learned  iu  duty.  Then  they 
taught  them  to  select  from  among  themselves  certain  officers— gave 
them  the  qualifications,  and  showed  them  in  their  own  persons  how 
they  were  to  be  set  apart  and  ordained  to  these  offices. — For  example 
the  deacons^  or  public  servants  of  the  church  of  Jerusalem,  the  mother 
church.  Again,  they  taught  tliem  to  send  out  missionaries  or  evan- 
eelists,  as  in  the  church  of  Antioch ;  and  finally,  to  ordain  elders  or 
bishops  over  the  flock,  as  soon  as  they  had  persons  Qualified  for  that 
ofIi*,e.— Tliey  taught  the  church,  then,  to  have  bishops  and  deacons, 
and  evangelists  (or  general  missionaries,  as  the  case  may  be).  They 
gave  the  law,  the  qualifications,  and  the  mode  of  inducting  them  into 
office.  They  never  taught  any  one  church  to  depend  always  upon 
Jerusalem,  or  Antioch,  or  Rome,  or  Corinth ;  but  ihey  taught  the  w^ 
cessity  of  all  these  offices— gave  the  qualifications  of  the  officers,  and 
assisted  in  ordaining  them  in  many  particular  congregations,  of  which 
congregations  with  the  same  laws,  authority,  and  order,  there  never 
have  been  wanting  thousands  from  that  day  till  now. 

Order  has  its  foundation  in  nature.  The  highest  officers  were  call- 
ed seniors  or  elders ;  because  of  their  age ;  and  bishops  or  overseers, 
because  of  their  office.  Deacons,  not  having  so  much  authority  and 
glory,  and  not  having  a  salary,  like  bishops,  there  never  has  been 
among  them  any  controversy  about  succession !  But  had  there  been 
any  great  honor  or  reward  in  that  office,  we  should  doubtless  have  had 
as  much  ado  about  an  unbroken  line;  and  could  as  easily  find  one  in 
this  case  as  in  that  of  the  bishops  of  Rome,  or  Constantinople.  The 
same  order  obtained  in  the  christian  church— I  mean,  substantially, 
that  obtained  in  the  synagogues  of  the  Jews.  The  same  word 
jrfftrCi/TiMor  or  presbytery,  is  found  in  the  New  Testament  in  reference 
to  both  the  synagogue  and  the  church.  «  Stir  up  the  gift,"  ^cc"  tl»it 
is  in  thee,  by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery."  Indeed, 
the  synagogue,  much  more  than  the  tabernacle  or  temple,  was  the 
archetype  o?  the  order,  which  the  anostles  set  up.  In  every  case  the 
question  was  put  to  the  people,  "  Look  out,  choose  out,  select  from 
among  yourselves,"  &c.  .  •       n 

My  friend  is  almost  a  Protestant  on  some  points.  He  occasionally 
recommends  the  bible  to  his  flock,  and  he  says  that  the  ordinances  of 
religion  do  not  receive  their  virtue  from  an  unholy  or  holy  pope— that 
he  has  his  authority  to  administer  from  Christ  rather  than  from  the 

Indeed,  I  know  not  why  the  spirit  of  God  should  be  promised 
through  such  a  wretched  and  polluted  channel  as  the  popes  of  Rome, 
rather  than  to  operate  from  heaven  in  all  its  holy  influences  upon  those, 
who  by  its  appointment,  are  chosen  and  ordained  by  prayer,  fasting, 
and  imposition  of  hands,  as  deacons  or  bishops  of  the  christian  con- 
Kre<rations.  We  lose  nothing  then,  in  abandomng  the  leaky  and 
sinking  ship  of  pontifical  authority  in  the  Roman  Catholic  church.— 
[Time  expired.] 

Bdf^pad    10  o^loek,  J.  M, 
Risnop  PurceIjL  imea~~~ 

My  friend  has  set  me  the  example  of  recapitulating.  I  shall  not 
fail  to  do  so  in  due  time.  He  has  talked  around  one  of  the  invincibla 
texU  of  Scripture  which  I  had  adduced  for  Peter's  headship : "  Simot 


DBBATX  OF 


—..«,..,  lielioW  Sataa  httli  desired  to  hmw  yon,  (the  plurtl)  that  k« 
tnrnr  mh  you  as  wheat :  but  I  hare  prayed  for  tbib,  that  tbt  faitb 
ihil  mot;  and  thou,  being  converted,  eonfirm  thy  brethren."  St.  Luk© 
wi.  3S.  And  he  ffratnitously  asserts  that  "  Confirm"  here  means  only 
"  Comfoft"  But  will  any  man  say  that  such  an  interoretatioii  has 
weakened  the  force  of  my  argument  from  the  text,  or  destroyed  the 
avowed  eifect  and  object  of  the  Savior's  prayer,  namely  that  the  fiiith 
of  Peter  should  never  fail,  and  that,  in  it,  he  should  confirm  his  bre* 
tliPM  I  Let  him  shew  that  Christ  addressed  a  special  prayer,  for  any 
■iniilar  pnrpoee,  in  favor  of  all,  or  of  any  of  the  other  apostles,  and 
then  he  may  summon  Christ's  anpointed  chief  of  the  apostolic  band, 
to  surrender  his  preeminence.  It  he  cannot  do  this,  Peter  must  for 
ever  retain  his  supremacy — not  of  age,  nor  of  talents,  nor  of  priority 
of  call,  nor  of  conversion,  but  of  or ficb. 

He  again  asserts,  for  Mr.  C.  seems  to  think  we  must  ^nnl  every 
thing  to  his  assertions,  that  I  cannot  find  a  solitanr  proof  m  Irenaeus, 
or  ID  any  other  author  of  christian  antiquity,  that  Peter  was  ever  bish- 
op of  Rome.  Now  in  p.  169  of  this  Protestant  edition  of  Irensua 
w  find  that  warranu  It  is  in  chap.  I.  book  3,  *«  against  heresies.'* 
Ho  speaks  as  follows : 

••  Far  we  have  not  learned  the  ditposition,  or  econoinj,  of  oitr  Mlvatioa  firom 
tnj  others  than  those  throu^^h  whom  the  gospel  came  unto  us,  which,  indeed 
lh«j  firM  preMhed,  and  alterwardt,  bj  the  will  of  God,  del'iTered  to  ut  in  writ- 
ing, to  be  the  pillar  and  ground  of  our  faith.  Nor  is  it  lawful  to  saj,  at  soma 
do,  who  pretend  to  correct  the  apostles,  that  they  preached  before  they  had  had 
psflect  iKMrledge.  For  after  uie  Lorid  had  arisen  from  the  dead,  they  wert 
dMMd  with  virtue  from  on  high  by  the  Holy  Spirit  who  came  down  upon  them, 
■■d  they  were  filled  with  all  knowledge  and  attained  to  perfect  understanding; 
tlmy  WMit  to  the  ends  of  the  earth  announcing  to  ut  the  good  thing*  which  ara 
liNHitGod,  and  proclaiming  heavenly  peace  to  men,  having  both  all  and  each  of 
tht  m  the  gospel  of  God.  Thut  Matthew,  in  their  own  language,  wrote  tha 
Ktfipel  scripture  ia  Hebrew,  while  Peter  and  Paul  were  evangelising  and  found- 
lag  the  church  of  Rome.  AtVr  their  departure,  Mark,  a  disciple,  and  Peier*§ 
Mllpntfer,  likewise  announced  to  us  the  prescribed  doctrines;  next  John,  th« 
dileijple  of  the  Lord,  who  also  reposed  on  his  breast,  published  likewise  a  gospel 
rcficiiig  at  Epheant,  in  Atia.  And  all  these  delivered  to  us  the  doctrine  of  On« 
God,  th«  Creator  of  heaven  and  earth,  announced  by  the  Lord  and  the  propheta, 
and  one  Christ,  the  Son  of  God;  to  whom,  he  who  assenteth  not,  despiseth  the 
partaken  of  the  Lord,  despiseth  Chritt  the  Lord,  despiseth  the  Father,  and  it 
condemned  by  himtelf,  for  he  retltteth  and  oppoaeib  his  own  salvation,  which 
all  heretict  do." 

Ttaeiag  the  tncceition  of  bishop  in  the  tame  chair,  he  alwayi  make  Peter  the 
ifat  bUop,  at  I  have  already  Miewn  fntm  the  very  next  page— 170,  of  this 
volume. 

There  Is  Iiensns,  a  wiiter  of  the  2d  century— year  150.    I  shall 
oUow  the  devions  track  of  the  gentleman  at  well  as  I  can. 

My  friend  denied  that  I  could  adduce  a  solitary  testimony  to  prove 
that  the  legale  of  the  pope  presided  over  the  first  great  general  conn* 
ell  of  the  church,  after  the  council  at  Jerusalem,  Now  I  am  going 
to  addooe  Baronins,  p.  395,  vear  of  Christ  325,  rear  of  Sylvester  12, 
CoMtanliiie  20 :  (how  fiiithnil  and  eiaet  oar  Catholic  histories  are !) 

**'Btiam  we  proceed  to  narrate  the  history  of  the  acta  of  the  Nicene  council* 
I  wmy  yon,  liriendly  reader, to  pause  with  me,*  to  notice  the  most  eminent  prelates 
of  that  illustrious  company  of  saints,  that  most  flowery  crown  of  fathers,  and  niost 
illttinguished  assemblage  of  holy  bishops,  whose  names  thine  forth  from  amidst 
the  obscurity  of  so  ancient  a  period.  He  who  first  attracts  our  attention,  con- 
spicuous for  having  been  twice  legate,  is  Osius,  bishop  of  Cordova,  in  Spain,  re- 
MreMuting  the  bithopt  of  Spaia,  and,  at  we  have  already  said,  holding  tne  place 
{iIm  Latin  it  itill  itfongtf--^raonam  genaa— panooatuif )  Sylvester,  bitbop  el 


BOBtAN   CATHOUC    RELI6IOK. 


14S 


RoMa.  aad  chief  of  the  legatet,  hit  colleaguea.  Now,  continues  Baroniua,  what 
Mod  iround  could  there  have  been  for  Osius'  sieninf.  before  his  colleagues,  the 
W«.  before  the  bishops  of  the  second  and  tLird  sees  oi  the  cbristiaii  world, 
viT  Alexandria  and  Ant.och,  and  belore  Ccecihan,  the  primate  of  all  Africa,  not 
to  soeak  of  others,  unless  he  held  the  place  and  represenlea  the  person  of  the 
hiffhwt  power  of  alH  He  then  quotes  the  commencement  of  the  letter  which 
thi  legate,  immediately  after  the  council,  addres«fd  to  the  pope:  "To  Sylve.- 
ter,  most  Wetted  pope  if  the  city  of  Rome,  and  enUtled  to  all  reverence,  Ojius. 
bishop  of  the  provmce  of  Spain  and  city  of  Cordova,  Victor  and  Viocentius. 
priests  of  the  city  of  Rome,  appointed  by  your  direction,     Ac.  &c.    So  far 

N^lTlex.  says,  vol.  tii.  p.  68,  "The  synod  of  Nice,  first  of  the  oerumcnirals, 
was  convoked  by  the  emperor  Constantine,  with  consent  of  the  Roman  pontilt,  hy  l- 
fetter— the  president  of  the  council,  in  the  name  of  St.  Sylvester,  and  his  le 
rates  were  Osius.  bishop  of  Cordova.  Vitus  or  Vito,  and  Vmnentius,  priests,  ^r.&c. 
It  was  the  custom  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  send  a  bishon  and  two 
inferior  ecclesiastics  to  represent  him  in  the  councils.  Osius  was 
lecate  and  Victor  and  Vincentius  were  his  two  assistants. 

^'alalia  Alexander  says  the  same,  p.  68, 1  vol.  Fleury,  another  most 
authentic  historian,  a  man  of  prodigious  learning,  a  contemporary  of  Bos- 
suet,  and  one  who  has  been  very  severe  against  the  popes,  so  that  we 
have  quarreled  with  him  for  it,  says  the  same,  p.  107  and  108.  He  adds : 
"  St? Athanasius  says  that  Osius  presided  at  all  the  councils,  and  it  is  certain 
that  he  presided  at  the  council  of  Sardica,  twenty  two  years  later. 

Now  we  cannot  see  why  a  simple  bishop  of  Cordova  should  have  presided, 
bv  anv  rirht  of  his,  over  all  the  bishops  of  the  world,  even  those  of  Alexandria 
and  A'nti«:h,  who  were  present  in  person-Gelasius  of  Cyiicum  savs  expressly 
that  Osius  held  the  place  of  Sylvester,  bishop  of  imperial  Rome,  with  the  priests 
Victor  (or  Vito,  as  he  was  also  called)  and  Vincentius:  and  his  testimony  should 
not  be  suspected,  as  he  was  a  Greek  and  writing  the  acts  and  records  of  Greeks. 
Subsequent  usage  »  conformable  to  what  is  here  obterved.— In  the  oecumenical 
councils  whose  acts  have  come  down  to  us,  we  see  the  papal  legates  at  the  head, 
and  they  are  commonly,  a  bishop  and  two  priests." 

Here  are  Baronius,  Noel  Alexander,  Fleury.— The  gentleman  rays 
that  I  deal  in  rhetoric,  hut  he  may  say  what  he  pleases ;  I  deal  m 
nothing  but  stubborn  facts.  These  are  the  irresistible  arguments  by 
which  Catholic  truth  is  upheld.  .,    ^  ,         i 

As  for  Peter's  executing  the  decrees  of  the  council  of  Jerusalem, 
I  said  no  such  thing.  He  acted  with  the  resU-but  he  did,  I  mam- 
tain,  lead,  and  his  authority  was  wanting  to  give  sanction  to  every 
decree.  When  he  spoke,  the  "  muck  digputing"  ceased.  He  spoke 
humbly,  but  authoritatively.  James  and  Paul  and  Barnabas  acquiesced. 
The  opposition  to  his  gentilmng  wzs  wron^  and  much  in  the  spirit  of 
more  modem  opposition,  but  Peter's  authority  then  as  it  has  ever  done 
prevailed ;  for  it  any  thing  is  certain  in  historical  testimony,  it  is  proved 
that  his  authority  was  acknowledged  to  reside,  in  ancient  days,  m 
his  successors.  So  is  it  now  acknowledged.  We  were  referred  to 
10.  John,  where  Christ  speaks  of  the  fold  and  the  sheep;  and  ob- 
jections were  made  to  my  interpretation  of  the  words  "lambs  Md 
♦•  sheep,"  as  contradictory  and  absurd.  But  now  mark,  my  friends, 
the  signal  diflference  between  the  two  passages.  In  10.  John,  tlie 
Savior  speaks  of  theep  ahne.  He  says  the  sheep  are  scattered,  and 
never  mentions  Iambi.  When  therefore  Christ  says  in  the  other  pas- 
sage, feed  my  lambs,  do  we  not  remark  that  he  afterwards  changes 
the  passage  and  says,  feed  my  sheep !  and  as  1  observed  yesterday 
Christ  means  pastors,  by  the  sheep  whom  the  lambs,  follow. 
Wide  as  the  worid,  is  Christ's  fold— and  there  are  over  its  va- 
rioas  provinces,  or  pastures,  many  shepherds,  but  one  above  the 


144 


WEBATM  Om  THl 


iMt,  whm»  duty  it  is  to  watch  orer  them  all,  to  aee  they  do  their  datf . 
—This  is  Peter,  this  is  reasonable,  it  is  as  it  ought  to  be.  Thus,  thf 
nek,  tlift  kejt,  the  charge  to  confirm  his  brethren,  the  acknowledge 
meit  oCPamf  that  he  went  to  see  Peler,  lest  he  might  have  run  in  vain. 
the  acknowledgment  of  the  authority  of  Peter's  successors,  the  very 
necessity  of  such  an  office  to  keep  order,  &c.  All  this  is  proof  positiyo 
from  BCTiptuie  and  history  and  reason,  of  the  supremacy  of  the  chair 
of  Peter,  and  not  rhetoric— or  if  so,  it  is  logical  rhetoric.  Let  not 
nsfipiure,  history  and  reason  be  thus  dismissed  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, with  a  wave  of  the  hand. 

That  elcmal  Du  Pin,  my  friends,  you  have  had  my  reasons  a^inst 
his  authenticity  as  a  Catholic  historian :  certainly  he  is^no  testimony 
against  the  Catholics.  All  my  friend  can  adduce  to  prove  that  the  au- 
thenticity of  Du  Pin  was  ever  recoffnixed  in  this  country,  is  that  some 
Catholic  paper  in  Kentucky,  m  he  «ay«,  allows  his  authenticity— 
Who  the  editor  of  this  paper  is,  I  know  not.  He  may  be  a  resocctable 
Catholic.  The  bishop  of  Bardstown  has  nothing  to  do  with  it,  the 
editor  is  liable  to  be  deceived.  His  opinion  ought  to  have  no  weight 
whatsoever  in  this  controversy. 

What  led  my  friend  into  such  an  error  respecting  the  book  itself, 
was,  probably  his  seeing  prefixed  to  it  the  censor's  license  for  its  im- 
pression; but  he  should  have  known  that  the  king  of  France  appoints 
tudi  persons  as  he  thinks  fit,  to  examine  wheiher  publications  con* 
tain  any  thing  dangerous  to  the  state.  And  Louis  Philip  is  more 
strict  in  this  respect  than  ever  Charles  X.  was,  who  was  exiled 
from  France  for  the  same  thing. 

The  Doctors  of  Sorbonne,  to  whom  the  work  was  submitted,  may 
have  said  the  book  contained  nothing  against  fiuik  and  moral*.  They 
do  not  say  that  he  is  an  auikentie  Catholic  historian.  We  apply  criticism 
to  every  work,  and  our  maxim  is  nuUiu*  addietus  jufnre  in  verba  ma- 
gigtri.  The  opinions  of  two  or  three  Doctors  of  Sorbonne  form 
no  rale  of  faith  for  Catholics,  although,  in  this  instance,  they  say 
nothing,  I  presume,  to  which  we  may  not  very  safely  assent,  while 
we  describe  Dn  Pin  in  his  proper  colors.  After  all  Du  Pin  says  noth- 
ing that  does  not  go  to  prove  my  views,  if  considered  fairly,  al- 
though he  was  expelled  the  Sorbonne  for  heterodox  opinions ! 

Now  there  were  vacancies,  breaks,  in  the  chain;  but  the  lapse  of 
a  few  yuars,  before  binding  together  the  links  of  the  apostolic  succes- 
sion, llii«i  not  affect  the  great  principle  for  which  I  am  contending. 
Wem  no  believers  in  meiempmfekmig.'  or  that,  like  the  supposed  divinity 
of  the  Lama  of  Thibet,  the  soul  of  a  deceased  pope  goes  by  shop,  skip 
and  jump,  right  off,  into  his  successor.  We  will  wait  six  months,  or  six 
years,  to  find  a  good  pope.  Time  is  taken  for  this,  since  so  much  de- 
pends on  the  result.  Now  in  this  chain  were  some  bad  popes ;  we 
weep  over  the  fact,  my  friends,  and  lament  it.  Mr.  C.  ought  to  have 
thrown  the  mantle  over  his  shoulders  and  walked  backwards  with  me 
and  covered  these  frailties,  for  the  sake  of  our  common  Christianity. 
llw  mass  of  the  succession  is  sound.    But  there  were  some  bad  points. 

It  is  not  the  name^  but  the  religion  they  represented,  that  we  regard. 
Whether  the  stream  of  testimony  came  to  us  through  conduits  of 
fold,  of  silver,  or  of  brass,  it  is  not  the  channel  of  communication  we 
itftid,  but  the  pure  chrystal  and  transparent  waters  of  celestial  doc- 
trine, of  divine  truth.  Men  are  liable  to  err— Jesus  Christ  said  there 
must  needs  be  scandals.    We  look  for  them ;  we  expect  them  to  occur 


SOMAN    CATHOUC    BELIOIOIf. 


145 


while  there  is  yet  remainioff  one  single  human  being  on  this  earth. 
None  but  God  is  perfect  and  man  is  good  only  hy  divine  assistance. 
I  have  no  special  apology  to  offer  for  a  pope  who  is  a  bad  man.  He 
should  be  the  pattern  of  the  flock  from  the  heart.  He  should  be  the 
salt  of  the  earth— the  li^ht  of  the  world.  He  should  remember  that 
the  "  mighty  shall  be  mightily  tormented*;"  and  that  "  a  most  severe 
judgment  shall  be  for  them  that  bear  rule  if  they  walk  not  according  to 
the  law."  I  should  not  be  surprised  if  these  bad  popes  were  at  this  moment 
expiating  their  crimes  in  the  penal  fires  of  hell.  But  what  is  the  pro- 
per inference  to  be  deduced  from  their  melancholy  aberrations  1  If 
they  like  Lucifer  have  fallen,  bright  lights  from  the  firmament  of  re- 
ligion, do  the  heavens  no  longer  proclaim  the  glory  of  God  1  Do 
the  praises  of  God  resound  there  no  more  t  Why  it  is  truly  wonder- 
ful, that,  bad  men  as  they  were,  they  should  not  only  have  never  se- 
vered themselves  from  the  faith  but  should  have  been  the  instru- 
ments of  perpetuating  sound  doctrine  at  home  and  abroad.  Nothing, 
my  friends,  gives  me  more  faith  in  the  genuineness  and  truth  of  our 
holy  religion,  than  when  in  reviewing  the  history  of  these  disgraceful 
enormities,  I  find  the  church,  in  the  very  midst  of  scandal,  enough  to 
blacken  and  overthrow  any  earthly  institution,  still  supported  and  up- 
held by  the  almighty  hand  of  God.  A  church  that  has  stood  through 
all  that  the  gentleman  has  laid  to  the  charge  of  the  merely  mortal 
men  who  have  presided  for  a  season  over  its  destinies.    A  pkw  op 

THEM  ERRED  IN  MORALS,  BUT  NONE  OF  THEM    IN    FAITH  ;  SOUnd  doctriue 

and  sound  morals  were  seen  and  admired,  during  tliese  sad  eclipses, 
and  infidel  nations  were,  during  that  passing  obscurity  in  Rome,  re- 
joicing in  the  beams  of  the  orient  sun  of  justice,  heralded  by  Catho- 
.ic  missionaries.  Let  this  be  borne  in  mind  when  my  learned  oppo- 
nent undertakes  to  prove  that  the  pope  is  the  sea-serpent !  And  let 
my  Protestant  friends  understand  that  the  Roman  Catholics  detest 
immorality  as  much  as  they  can,  wherever  it  may  be  found  :  and  most 
of  all,  where  superior  virtue  was  required  by  exalted  station.  We 
too  had  labored  for  a  reformation,  not  of  God's  truth,  for  it  needed 
none,  but  of  men's  morals  which  are  always  liable  to  corruption. 
We  may  cry  out  like  the  apostles,  when  we  behold  such  scandals,  O 
Lord,  save  us  ere  we  perish — ^but  we  hear  the  divine  answer,  "  why 
fear  ye,,0  you  of  little  faith."     No  cloud  has  ever  yet  impended 

OVER  THE  CHURCH,  THAT  THE  RAINBOW  OF  PROMISE  D'D  NOT  SHINE 
THROUGH  THE  6L00M. 

The  object  of  the  institution  of  the  church  being  no  other  than  to 
establish  the  true  worship  of  God,  by  the  overthrow  of  idolatrjr,  and 
to  sanctify  a  chosen  people  for  everiasting  life,  by  the  purest  virtues 
of  religion,  we  are  not  to  wonder  that  Satan,  the  jealous  enemy  of 
human  happiness,  should  exert  his  utmost  powers  to  obstruct  the  be- 
nevolent design.  In  fulfilment  of  the  Savior's  prediction,  and  from 
the  very  nature  of  man,  it  was  necessary  that  persecutions,  heresies, 
schisms  and  domestic  scandals  should  happen ;  but  Jesus  Christ  had 
likewise  foretold  that  they  should  not  prevail.  The  Pagan  tyrants  of 
the  earth  may  rage;  the  courage  and  patience  of  our  martyrs  will  tri- 
umph and  multiply.  Heresies  may  start  up  in  various  forms,  and 
for  a  while  seduce  thousands  into  error;  they  will,  at  length,  sink 
hack  again  into  the  dark  abyss  from  which  they  first  emerged.  Gui- 
ded by  the  spirit  of  truth,  and  confirmed  in  the  unity  of  her  belief, 
the  church  will  ever  successfully  oppose  to  their  impotent  attempts, 
N  10 


DEBATE   ON    TMB 


ihe  promisea  of  her  dWne  Foimdei.  the  antiquity  of  her  faith,  the  con- 
sent of  nations,  the  order  of  her  hierarohv,  t^^Jiolv  seventy  of  her 
discipline,  the  bright  example  of  thousands  of  her  feithtul  children 
the  sacred  history  of  her  doctrines,  and  the  decisions  of  her  councils 
Seiims  may  at  times  perplex  and  divide  the  faithful,  but  the  church 
by  her  authority  will  either  close  the  breach,  or  separate  the  refracto- 
ry members  from  her  communion.  The  vicious  lives  of  sonae  of  her 
diililraii  may  contradict  and  disgrace  their  christian  profession,  they 
inay  violate  her  laws,  they  may  insult  her  authonty,  and  invade  her 
sacred  riffhts ;  they  never  will  be  able  to  overturn  her  ministry,  to 
•hake  her  hierarchy  or  to  alter  her  doctrine.  She  will  never  cease  to 
wata  linners  of  their  duty,  to  correct,  to-  instruct,  to  direct  mankind 
k  the  way  of  salvation.  ...  ri. 

By  her  persevering  zeal  for  God's  honor,  by  the  force  of  her  ex 
hortaliODS,  by  the  solemnity  of  her  public  service,  by  the  morality  of 
her  pieeepts,  and  by  her  practice  of  the  evangelical  counsels,  she  will 
continue  to  prepare  souls  for  heaven,  while  she  exhibits  to  the  world 
a  rich  assemblage  of  the  most  heroic  virtues.  It  is  thus,  that  our  his- 
toif  attests  the  care  which  God  has  taken  of  his  church. 

The  whole  number  of  popes  has  been  nearly  two4iundred  and  sixty. 
Of  these,  the  first  forty  were  saints,  or  martyr8,a  small  number  only,  not 
more  than  twenty,  can  be  called  bad  men  ;  the  rest  were  remarkablo 
for  eminent  virtue,  charity,  leal,  learning  and  patronage  of  letters. 
Feter  was  twenty-five  years  bishop  of  Rome  ;  and  non  videbts  annoa 
Fetri,  you  will  not  be  pope  as  long  as  Peter— is  a  proverb  which 
everf  new  pope  hears.  Pius  VI.  and  Pius  VII,  came  nearest  to  the 
yeaw  of  Peter,  but  they  did  not  attain  them.  But  says  the  gentle- 
mant  the  pope  transferred  his  see  for  some  time  from  Rome,  to 
Aflgnon.  I  grant  it ;  but  have  I  not  said,  were  he  a  wanderer  m  A- 
byssinia,  he  would  still  retain  his  title  and  authority. 

We  were  told  of  a  council  which  cashiered  three  popes,  and  made 
a  fourth  !  My  friends,  what  sophistry  is  this?  Does  my  friend  think 
be  is  addressing  people  but  one  remove  from  barbarism,  instead  of  the 
enlightened  and  liberal  cia^ens  of  the  queen  of  the  westi  I  wish  hina 
to  understand  that  we,  at  least,  are  equal  to  the  people  of  Bethany  in 
intelligeftce.  Among  these  ciiiiens,  I  thank  God,  my  lot  is  cast. 
Does  Mr.  C—  suppose  thai  they  cannot  answer  his  sophistry  by  the 
tree  statement  of  the  fact!  The  council  cashiered  three  doubtful  popes, 
or  rather  no  popes  at  all,  and  elected  one  true  pope.  What  has  become 

of  his  logic  1  ,         jm,<    c 

Stephen  VI.  had  thebodj  of  Formosus  dug  up  and  cut  off  his  fingers. 
My  friend  has  taken  this  from  Pope  and  McGuire's  discussion,  and  hat 
■een  the  answer  there.  In  this  unpardonable  act  of  Stephen,  we  at 
least  discern  zeal  for  the  rules  of  discipline,  which  forbade  the  trans- 
mmm  of  a  bishop  from  one  see  to  another.  For  this  offence  the  need- 
iest act  of  severity  was  done.  It  shews  the  popes  expose  what  the/ 
think  wrong  in  popes ;  just  as  my  friend  would  know  nothing  of  their 
nMeeds,  if  Catholic  historians  had  not  had  sincerity,  piety  and  zeal 
to  denounce  them.  Genebrard  said  that  the  popes  were  more  often 
apostates  than  apostlet.  I  am  sure  that,  in  this  case,  truth  was  sac- 
rificed to  wit,  and  faithful  testimony  to  virtue  as  well  as  faithful  ex- 
misition  of  vice,  for  the  jingle  between  the  words  apostates  and 
ipoatles.     But  Genebrard   says    not,  absolutely,  they   were  apoa- 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    KMJGIOff. 


147 


tattt,  but  that  they  had  fallen  short  of  the  virtues  of  theb  predecet* 
sors. 

My  friend  qaarrelt  with  the  name,  cardinals.  The  name  is  Latin  and 
at  old  as  that  language.  But  I  will  not  contend  for  the  name.  He 
says  the  cardinalt,  were  not  so  called  for  1000  years,  but  did  not  show 
bis  authority.  This  was,  however,  the  title  given  to  priests  charged 
with  the  care  of  large  churches,  as  far  back  as  the  year  150,  or  at 
least  in  300.  But  call  them  what  you  ma]^,  they  were  a  portion  and 
an  eminent  portion,  of  the  Roman  clergy  in  all  ages.  Now,  as  for 
merly,  there  are  cardinal  priestSt  cardinal  deacons,  and  even  cardinal 
laymen.  They  are  a  superior  order  of  men,  the  patrons  of  the  arts 
and  sciences,  as  well  as  the  ornamentt  and  supports  of  the  church, 
and  the  benefactors  of  the  poor.  They  liberally  entertain  and  treat  our 
travelling  fellow-citizens  with  great  civility — for  instance,  Mr.  Dewey, 
an  Unitarian  minister,  lately  in  Rome,  and  cardinal  Weld,  a  dis- 
tinguished English  nobleman,  in  whose  father*s  castle,  at  Lulworth, 
if  I  am  not  mistaken,  our  first  archbishop,  the  cousin  of  Charles  Car- 
roll of  Carrollton,  was  consecrated  bishop Read  Mr.  Dewey^s  ele- 
gant and  thrilling  pages.  They  will  almost  make  you  a  Catholic. 
Certainly  they  will  liberalize  your  minds  already  raised  far  above  vul- 
gar prejudices.  The  cardinals  elect  the  pope — but  if  the  pope  creates 
the  cardinals,  surely  he  does  not  create  his  own  electors ! 

Mr.  C. —  has  not  told  us  yet,  from  what  true  and  holy  apostolic 
church,  the  Roman  church  apostatized.  He  has  told  you  of  the  Albi- 
genses,  Vaudois,  Novatians,  Donatists,  &c.,  but  they  furnish  no  con- 
tinuous church.  They  are,  I  say  again,  ignoble  ancestry.  My  friends, 
read  history  for  yourselves  if  you  wish  to  see  what  a  miserable  set  of 
wretches  these  sectarians  were. 

My  friend  says,  that  Peter  was  married — ^but  I  defy  him  to  prove 
that  be  retained  his  wife  after  he  became  a  bishop.  I  will  meet  Mr. 
Campbell  on  this  doctrine  of  the  celibacy  of  this  clergy,  and  shew 
him  in  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  1st  Cor.  i.  26,  and  in  those  of  Jesus 
Christ,  Matthew  xix.  13,  whose  expressions,  although  he  was  purity 
itself,  I  dare  not  repeat  in  Mr.  C — ^'s  fastidious  ears,  **  that  there  are 
not  many  wiu  according  to  thejlesh.**  St.  Paul,  who  was  a  bachelor, 
says,  1st  Cor.  vii.  *^  I  would  that  all  were  as  myself.  I  say  to  the 
unmarried  and  the  widows ;  it  is  good  for  them  if  they  so  continue 
even  at  1.  ▼.  8.  He  that  is  without  a  wife  is  solicitous  for  the  things 
that  belong  to  the  Lord,  how  he  may  please  God.  But  he  that  is  with 
a  wife,  is  solicitous  for  the  Uiings  of  the  v.-orld,  how  he  may  please 
his  wife  :  and  he  is  divided.  And  the  unmarried  woman  and  the  vir- 
gin thinketh  on  the  things  of  the  Lord,  that  she  may  be  holy  both  in 
body  and  spirit.  But  she  that  is  married  thinketh  on  the  things  of  the 
world,  how  she  may  please  her  husband.^*  Read  the  entire  chaptei. 
Marriage  was  ordained  by  Almighty  God  for  the  propagation  of  tht 
human  race.  The  Catholic  church  not  only  approves  the  institution,  bat 
teaches  that  Christ  hath  exalted  it  to  the  dignity  of  a  sacrament.  St. 
Paul,  while  he  wishes  all  to  be  like  himself,  unmarried,  still  acknow- 
ledges that  all  are  not  called  to  that  state;  and  they  who  cannot  prac- 
tise continence,  he  wishes  to  marry;  so  does  the  Catholic  church.  Her 
ministers  are  not  allowed  to  take  a  vow  of  chastity  until  they  have  at- 
tained an  age  when  they  can,  aided  by  divine  grace,  decide  on  their 
capability  for  its  pure  observance.     And  now,  young  ladieti  and  gen- 


^':liS 


mmAvm  ii?i  the 


SOMAir   CATHOLIC    EUJOION. 


149 


^ggl9  pM  mmm  hotnmm  WlMt  Mr.  O.  wovM  mke  yon, 
the  .ncce-wft  c/Pimlkiiiis-  They  eondemned  all  ^^^/^^^^J^JJ^*' 
Zviiiff  that  niifrim  came  ffom  the  evil  principle.  B«^  ra™^*^^' 
SZ  lei  us  S^l  that  oar  daya  In  this  life  aie  iminbered ;  the 
mw^Z  Z^n^denth^n  earliest  victims.  -  For  the/«.A^of  this 
SSStrys^e  ap Jtle,pas8eth  aw.^"  Lei  prksts  then  ^ogocAerea 
rCalhofio  lelimooa  haw  done,  to  the  whole  human  family,  lenoone- 
Zg  llTSea  that  would  hind  them  to  a  few  only,  that  they  may  be  like 
-€od,  the  lathers  and  henefectors  of  many*  _  ^^^  .  . .  -  .,  ... 
Mi.  C.  spoke  of  ministering  to  the  siek.  l^^^^J^^  ^el  ills  of 
In  d«da  of  eharity,  the  Cartiolic  priesthood,  '^'f  ;?!i^^^l:£ZlwI 
all  oiders,  are  unsurpassed.  Their '  labor  of  love'  is  seen  in  the  hospiial, 

the  fm^m,  ihe*^ dungeon,  the  ^P^^^^^^'^'^iJlZl^nf^^^^^ 
makeTlts  dreadful  rava«es,  where  the  peattlence  atalketh  at  noonday,  oi 

■lidniffht  I    Hear  Waddingtoo^  .     ,  ...         

*S  UmuUhm.  Of  th*  more  modem  orden.  there  it  tisoone  wfcich  asy  mm 

10  wMwm^  amr  7'T7_~|r«-  ti,«„^k  the  laint  from  wrboin  it  received  iti 
di  Bi«ia,  ,•*?»*  •^rJ.^J' J  n5^^^^^^  yenn  afterward..     lU 

■MMJrt »k  B*"*".^  •  "^^.f  J/K^^^  ^Sm  prmirtive  form  of  atretic 
clMificter  wai  pecalmr,  and  recall*  our  anenuon  lo  um  P"""  . . .  .  -:--,i-  „f 
SIvotiM.  Thidutiea  of  tho«  holy  sittert  were  the  puretl  within  the  circle  of 
hI2rbi«etaU»ce--to  minbter  to'  the  .ick.  to  rtlieire  the  poor,  to  co»«>l« '^J 
Sr^rS^  IW^h  the  penitent  These  charilmble  ^^^J^^^^flf^^ 
to«x™tiwi&?tthebondSf  any  coinuiunity.  without  the  obl.gation   ofanj^ 

!1!«^  ToiTwithout  any  leparatioii  from  society,  any  renouncement  of  theii 
riSk  dXi  «d  .frtSS:  Tnd  m  admirably  wire  t^se  office.>  mil  .on.  ol 
ia^S.pSformed.  that  had  all  other  female  order,  been  really  a.  use le^  and 
Ti^^lSey  •!«  iometime.  fiilself  deicribed  to  be,  the  t.riue.  of  the  Lnm- 

calwuaiea."    Waddlntto  •  i  Church  Hiit.  PK«  3;^.  New  York  edit.  183o. 

STr!  C.  spoke  of  lad  popes,  Nicholas  HI.  &c.  &c.  and  of  monksj-- 
Hear  a^nl-what  this  Protestant  historian  says  of  them  and  of  this 

^^  k'lSISLiit  mmm  that  Roman  Catholic  writer,  iraunt  the  di«ntere.t^ 

wiritual  want,  of  the  poor,  how  frequ.nt  .n  priwni  «id  ^.^  'ccLio.u  X^ 

£rt*rafon:;tKlrh7i:Wl  -  -tjoduced  i°to  *he -^h  of  Furo^ 
SfVre  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  centur|.    In  the  twelfth,  we  objer^e  Bole., 
huu  duke  of  Poland,  opening  the  path  for  It.  reception  in  Pomerania  by  the 
Ir;dTl!^  L  like  mannrr.  Sk  the Wonian.  •«i*\»^;:i^^ 
tar  convenion  bf  conquett    Again,  Ufbas  Vlll.  cooiecrated  Mamnwa,  an  ■■- 

z^^m:zz:^^ooo^  *^'T*-''iss*Tthe'i:^'dTa:?n'::; 

iheiii- the  bi.hop  conquered  hk  M>e,  and  promulgated  at  the  head  oi  an  armr 
STSkSfi  of  oSngelfcal  concord.  The  lame  nietEod.  were  pur.ued  by  Innoc^^nt 
ni.  iTiSm  thaf  time  forward  m.  ind  much  more  5fT«*»*  .•«*^^  ^^ 
.bakmariea,  who«*  labour,  wene  directed  to  •«^««af^"l^*^,8^'^^ 

intimate,  w,  -i  leaat.  by  pmceful  meanp.  **^  »Y^„S™!;^*^KX  k  »^ 
iSmi^tiifbil^  w  th  mere  nominal  conver.ion9,  and  that  otber.  naa  coieny  in  vi^w 
SSrSlrow.  ndt-iicement,  oj  the  extension  of  the  P^ff'^^^^^^'l'^.S^ 
Se^wete  Hkewiwi  many  who  were  animated  by  the  "7*  «J™7JJ*  "^^'i*** 

SHhoae  e«Hion^  if  thej  feiW  of  «W»-^%XThi^^th"^  ZSeiS 
want  nf  diiintercfted  devotion.    The  miwioM  of  the  Ihirteentii  and  ioiin«e«i« 

Si*.  :2JrjSciH«y  diryrted  to  lb.  -'*  o^ -^^  ""^^^  i^.'sr'  J^ 

Mmt  an  embawf.  compoMsd  of  Dominican*  and  FranciMJan.,  to  tn«  V/^^v/^^; 
rSe^ly  Sunica^on  wa>  to  maintained,  tliat  Uie  enroy.  of  Abaca,  thei. 


kine,  were  present,  in  1371,  at  Iha  second  coancil  of  Ljona.  NicbdM  III.  (is 
1278)  and  Nichola.  IV.  (ra  1289.)  renewed  those  exertion..  John  of  Monta 
Corvino.  a  Franciwan,  wa.  distinguished  during  the  cooclu.ion  of  the  century 
by  the  success  of  his  bborp;  and  in  1307,  Clement  V.  erected  an  archiepiscopid 
we  al  Cambalu,  (Fekin,)  which  he  conferred  upon  that  missionary.  Seven  other 
bishops,  also  Franciscans,  were  sent  to  his  support  by  the  same  pope;  and  this 
distant  branch  of  the  hierarchy  was  carefully  nourished  by  succeeding  pontidi^ 
especially  John  XXII.  and  Benedict  XII.  It  is  certain  that  the  number  of  Chris- 
tians  was  not  inconsiderable,  both  among  the  Chinese  and  Moguls,  as  late  as  the 
year  1370.— and  they  were  still  increasing,  when  they  were  suddenly  swept 
away  and  almost  wholly  exterminated  by  the  Mahometan  arms.  Howbeit,  th« 
disastrous  overthrow  ot  their  establishment  detracts  nothing  from  the  merit  of 
those  who  constructed  it;  and  it  must  not  be  forgotten,  that  the  instruments  in 
this  work  were  Mendicanto,  aad,  for  the  most  pert.  Franciscans."    lb.  p.  547. 

The  Methodists  have  done  themselves  honor  by  the  praises  they  hare 
bestowed  on  Francis  Xavier,  a  Jesuit.  They  have  published  his  life, 
and  to  day,  if  I  have  time,  I  will  quote  from  it  some  beautiful  extracts. 

They  and  other  Protestants  have  also  published  Thomas  a  Keropis, 
or  the  christian  pattern.  Where,  except  m  the  Gospel,  can  purer  mo- 
rality be  found  t  And  Thomas  a  Kempis  was  a  monk.  We  are  told 
that  Sacchi  said  that  the  Albigenses  and  Vaudois  made  a  thow  cf  piety. 
TTiat  is  a  fact,  and  a  pretty  show  it  was.  I  will  not  read  the  indicated, 
but  forbidden  page  of  narrative  sincere — ^better  blot  it  with  a  tear ! 

If  the  pope  18  charged  with  severity  to  kings,  it  is  because  kinp 
were  tyrants  and  the  pope  was  the  advocate  of  the  weak,  and  the 
enemy  of  arbitrary  power.  The  people  were  crushed,  and  had  no  re- 
source but  in  the  influence  which  God  gave  to  the  head  of  the 

church. 

"  With  all  Its  errors,  (the  pnpacy^s.)  its  corruptions,  and  its  crimes,  ft  was, 
morally  and  intellectually,  the  conservative  power  of  Christendom.  Politically, 
too,  it  was  the  savior  of  Europe;  for,  in  ail  human  probability,  the  west,  like 
the  east,  must  have  been  overrun  by  Mahommedanism,  and  sank  in  irremediable 
degradation,  through  the  pernicious  institutions  which  have  everywhere  accom- 
panied it;  if,  in  that  great  crisis  of  the  world,  the  Roman  church  had  not  roused 
the  nations  to  an  united  and  prodigious  effort  -commensurate  with  the  danger. 

In  the  frightful  state  of  society  which  prevailed  during  the  dark  ages,  the 
church  everywhere  exerted  a  controlling  and  remedial  influence.  Every  place 
of  wor.hip  was  an  asylum,  which  was  always  respected  by  the  law,  and  general^ 
even  by  lawless  violence.    It  is  recorded,  as  one  of  the  peculiar  miseries  of  St^ 

S hen's  miserable  reign,  that  during  those  long  troubles,  the  soldiers  learned  to 
isregard  the  right  of  sanctuary.  Like  many  other  parts  of  the  Romish  svstem, 
this  nght  had  prevailed  in  the  heathe»  world,  though  it  was  not  ascribed  to 
every  temple.  It  lad,  as  it  had  done  under  the  Romish  empire,  to  abuses  which 
became  intolerable;  but  it  originated  in  a  humane  and  pious  purpose,  not  only 
screening  offenders  from  laws,  the  severity  of  which  amounted  to  injustice,  but, 
in  cases  of  private  wrong,  affording  time  tor  passion  to  abate,  and  for  the  desire 
of  vengeance  to  be  appeased.  The  cities  of  refuge  were  not  more  needed,  under 
the  Mosaic  dispensation,  than  such  asylums  in  ages  when  the  administration  of 

instica  was  cither  detestably  inhuman,  or  so  lax,  that  it  allowed  free  scope  to 
idivklnal  resentment.  They  have,  therefore,  generally  been  found  wheraver 
there  are  the  first  rudiments  of  civil  and  religious  order.  The  churchyards  aU* 
were  privileged  places,  whither  the  poor,  people  conveyed  their  goods  for  secu- 
rity. The  protection  which  the  ecclesiastical  power  extended  in  such  cases,  kept 
np  in  the  people,  who  so  often  stood  in  need  of  it.  a  feeling  of  reverence  and  at- 
tachment to  the  church.  They  felt  that  religion  had  a  power  on  earth,  and  that 
It  was  always  exercised  for  their  benefit.  •        r     i^r 

The  civil  power  was  in  those  ages  so  inefficient  for  the  preservation  of  public 
tranquility,  that  when  a  country  was  at  peace  with  all  its  neighbors,  it  was  liable 
to  be  disturbed  by  private  wars,  individuals  taking  upon  themselves  the  right  of 
deciding  their  own  quarrels,  and  avenging  their  own  wrongs.  Where  there 
misted  Bo  deadly  fetid,  pnttttts  weft  eawly  nmd*  by  tnrbalcat  ami  rapaooiif  m*m, 
m2 


I 


'pgBATB  ON  THS 

awl  DMM»able  p«rt of  the  community  (.wwayi  ui«5r^»*» /*,  ,        .  „,»—-- 

iiwlcr  whoM  protection  tJi«y  tbpt.four  night.  <>*«».  7«**'°PS^»J;"^^^ 
X  <bir«N>Hd  hat*  b««i  in  pert'  •'«!  ^««''-    !*»«  T!^  i^JJir^ltioS 

mmmm;  if  the  monarch  fro»  eiKitngered  or  <>PP;*^,„??J^ 
SSTwby  a  combiiMitioii  of  hi.  baron.,  ^f^Tie  J/lhl^l^BhMdwZ 
r!Ii7  Jl^rt  fnr  an  elTectual  inlerpo.  tioo  in  hit  behalf;  and  the  nme  iDieia  wm 
could  rf»ort  tova  ^^^y'^^^lCZ  -^i-j  noon  the  pope  to  defend  them  again.! 

We  are  told  that  Peter  exercised  the  ^.commission  of  Apostle^ 
SdI  that  therefore  he  could  not  have  been  bishop  of  Rome,  and  ^ 
dot  Paul  was  sent  to  the  Gentiles  and  Peter  to  the  Jews,  But  Feter 
was  *e  first  apoeUe  sent  to  the  Gentile»-Av  the  angel  af  God.  He 
Tceived  CornSius  the  centurion  into  the  cliureh.  He  founded  ^e 
mm  of  Antioch-a  Gentile  city.  If  Peter  was  ^m^^^  u  .» af  R^l 
Zld,  where  should  he  place  Sis  head  qujiiter.  !  ^^he^^^^^ 
the  nistiess  of  the  world,  worthy  field  for  a  chief  apoefle  s  seal, 
wheThlwiild  at  once  he  heard  by  Gendles  and  bj  Jews. by  Greeks, 

Barharians  and  Romans,  -d—--  <>« 

We  are  told  there  are  no  vices  to  be  discovered  in  the  ^^J^ 
perofs  more  flaunt  and  jjloomy  than  •^«^*»^  *^J,^^£™^ 
£it  they  became  proverbial  for  their  imquity.  But  I  l»«r  "''^J.^^^^ 
ihese  sweeping  denunciations  are  glaringly  untrue.  Jhere  were  39 
nartyfa  mtJ^m  or  270  pop^,  1?  there  were  a  few  ^«d  men  i^ong 
them,  shall  we  for  that  reason  fling  awav  our  felth  !  »<f«^^h^^^^ 
■o1  Did  he  not  say  that  it  must  needs  be  that  w^dals  come  i  Ana 
wm  lot  the  vast  majority  of  the  popes  enUtled  to  ▼«nera^>on] 
SuppoM  there  were  ahout  a  do«en  that  were  "^''^JJ"*;.*"**,?^*!*!^^^^ 
wcreeven  fifty  of  various  rfiades  of  guilt,  or  imperfecUon,  there  were 
■ail  uDwards  of  200  worthy.  Christ  has  said  that  "many  are  called, 
hut  few  chosen."  Show  me  200  of  the  Roman  emperore  or  a  likt 
proportion  of  any  other  rulers,  to  the  popes,  who  were  as  good  men, 
Ld  who  have  'deserved  to  go  to  heaven.  Shall  we  pomt  to  Nero 
Mdiiif  ap  the  da^r  which  he  h^f  Pliing«i  '"^^^^^^^^^^  «  Z 
—  iiMitherl  to  Diocletian,  the  man  of  sin, — ^ine  anucnn»  ai  um 


spMtliit,  who  mowed  down  hundreds  of  meek  and  peaceful  disciples 
iToiicel-to  Caligula,  the  murderer  of  the  «aints  T-to  M^^^^^ 
m  m  mm^tm  Majumin  I  Where  is  there  a  paimllel  to  their  atroea- 
tiflst  Mf  friend  has  talked  of  the  inquisition,  and  on  that  ooint  alio  i 
will  meet  him.  The  inquisition  was  the  vice  of  the  age  and  fw<  of  W« 
flwiish.  It  was  unknown  for  many  centunes.  In  many  Oatnoiic 
MUtfies  it  was  never  received.  Other  churches  and  times  Have, 
likewise,  their  sins  of  blood  to  answer  for.  [Time  expired.] 

Haff-pad  11  o'ehek^  Jt  M 

Mr.  Campbell  ri8es~-~ 
My  Mends  if  we  proceed  in  this  course  we  never  shall  di'^iff  J^e 
.A^ —  ^g  have  before  us.    If  we  iw  to  ait  here  and  Ustea  t# 


SOMAH   CATHOLIC    BBUGION. 


151 


such  a  variety  of  matter  wholly  irrelevant  *«  ^he  que^*'^'!  f  f,„^^*l' 
Mver  prove  any  thing,  or  know  what  Is  proved.  Must  we  haycques 
Tons  iS^^ncS  reaching  back  to  the  beginning  of  the  discussion  and 
fonvaid  to  its  close,  and  touching  upon  the  whole  system  ?f  theology 
inTe^  siILht  I  have  said  llreVdy  I  will  not  lose  sight  of  my 
duty  so  as  to  respond  to  every  thing  in  one  speech. 

Tafmost  trembled  when  my  opponent  arose  with  «o  niudb  pomp 
and  appearance  of  having  found  a  triumphant  P'«f  °^„^*«  ^^^^^t 
ksomrhidden,and  by  me,  unexplored  c^^-^.^'/ 'ff  "^^^^^s  u 
said  I  to  myself,  have  f  not  thoroughly  examined  this  jn^"^;^*  »J 

P«ible  thit  there  yet  remains  ?f  P*«««^%«"^b"Jj;  was Tven^  Ut^ 
my  assertion,  and  have  I  committed  myself  1     But  it  was  even  a  iii- 

tle  less  alan^inff  than  his  blustering  about  the  consecraUon  of  Fhocas. 
lie  less  alarming  u  a s  -       ,  ^^  ^^  ^^^    ^^ 


deed.  It  was  ine  same  uiu  owij  ucw  T-wf.--   .j  ,.     v:i„  t>,^ 

X'jSer^e  at  all,  to  the  present  debate.  lren«us  said,  wh.^  P^ 
i^va  Paul  were  founding  the  congregation  at  Rome.  J  wo"'* 
Mk. T there  in  this  audienci,  any  stripling  n.  knowledge,  who  und«. 
■tauldB  that  founding  a  congregation  makes  a  man  bishop  ot  that 
eh^h  Tmm^  ^Missiolarifs  p  ""oad  they  plant  con^egations 

in  particular  places;  and  they  go  R"™ /'•>»"n  *°  «°""V7: C"  ^ 
to  citT.  to  found  other  churches.  Are  they  bishops  of  all  the  cong" 
pS  Sat  they  establish  1  It  is  essential  to  a  missionary  not  to  be 
^.ionary.  But  why  expose  a  matter,  already  evident  »«  all !  It^s 
the  ffentieman's  last  effort.  He  has  explored  all  antiquity,  and  all 
fclMn  find  after  three  or  four  days'  search,  is  this  single  fragment  of 
..21  SiliC^on  h^ay,  that  Pm\  and  Peter ;,fa»/«i. the  church  at 
Rome^  So  ends  the  controversy  on  that  point,  the  main  pillar  of  the 
Roman  church.  There  is  anothir  little  matter  (there  are  too  man, 
Uttle  matters)  which  I  wish  to  dispose  of. 

The  gentleman  affects  a  great  accuracy  in  his  k""*  ^-^gf '  ""f^S^'J 
precision  on  the  part  of  his  authorities.  He  seerns  to  glory  in  Ito 
ioit  of  reputation,  else  I  would  not  select  this  trifle.  Ho*  <>f^»  "^ 
heassertJd  that  Sylvester  summoned  the  council  of  Nice,  and  that 
Sfe^^lepes  presided  over  it !  And  how  often  has  he  med  to 
move  It '  Like  some  other  matters  already  disposed  of,  after  sleeping 
r^  nights  upon  t^  subject,  as  one  that  had  a  pleasant  dream,  he 

Slak^^s  anraffinns\gaii,  that  Osius  ?,f>-tttd''heTroW 
of  Sylvester,  and  as  such  presided  at  Nice.  But  did  he  P^^e  "  • 
I  sh^l  read  you  some  tesUmony  on  this  .""bjfct.  d»  *»•  "°*^^^,'^ 
tn  the  weisht  of  mv  argnmenU  one  gram  of  sand ;  but  to  prove  tnai 
when  nSxi  any  tkng  as  a  fact,  I  dolt  advisedly,  and  will  stand  to  lU 
Pe^itmenow  to  corfect  a  mistake  into  which  the  gentleman  has 
aE  that  1  rriied  upon  the  testimony  of  an  ephemeral  paper  in  Ken- 
SckT.  I  did  not  say,  that  it  was  upon  wch  authority  1  read  any  au- 
&re.  M?  al  luLn  to  *»t  paper  was  a  pure  „rg»-«/u».  «rf^ 
minem,  and  was  made  for  bishop  Pnreell  and  "»  °»f. '''^;  L '^e 
bUhop  of  Bardstown  or  some  of  his  clergy  admitted  that  tusebius 
Md  l?u  Pin,  though  not  good  Catholics,  "  were  authentic  historians 
But  that  admission  gives  them  no  new  weight,  or  ^d^^^  no  weight  at 
.11  w  th  me  I  havl  already  given  my  reasons  for  the  authority  ot  Uu 
pL  Brwherfmav  I  asLls  his  authority  for  Sylvester's  calling 
Sf'coun^il^f  Ni;se!  ^The  emperor  did  it  at  the  general  suggesuon 


I 
I 


^ 


152 


HfllATK   071    TRX 


of  tlie  eastern  bishops.  And  If  Osius  presided,  we  have  no  reason 
to  think  that  h©  m  it  as  tho  pope's  legate.  For  Uiis  we  have  an- 
dtlt  wthority.  The  goiieman  spoke  in  warm  admiration  ot  Usi- 
118 :  but  did  he  not  apostatize,  or  some  way  lose  his  orthodoxy  1]  Ho 
was,  indeed,  a  learned  and  talented  man— a  sort  of  standing  presi- 
dent in  the  early  councils ;  and  in  thai  age  of  the  world  as  among  ee- 
clwiMtios  there  were  few  men  of  general  learning,  we  therefore  find 
Mit  OOMilciious  in  all  assemblies ;  and  his  name  stands  first  in  tho 
Bobtofiptions  of  the  decrees  and  creeds  of  the  early  part  of  the  4tli 
century,  hut  that  he  presided  as  the  pope's  legate  in  any  council,  esp© 
cially  that  of  Nice,  is  insusceptible  of  proof. 

We  shall  however  hear  antiquity  on  the  subject. 

"Coiiilmitiiie  «eeing  that  lie  had  labored  Id  mm  to  allay  Ihaditputei  whicli 
Jivldad  tiM  church,  thought  it  would  be  the  inoit  ready  and  elTectual  nieam  to 
restore  peace,  to  call  a  nuuieroui  synod  composed  of  eastern  and  western  bubom. 
Thii  council  was  called  acumenical,  i.  e.  a  council  of  the  whole  world,  or  Ui« 
wlwle  earth,  because  it  was  called  together  from  all  parts  of  the  Ronian  empire, 
to  which  the  title  of  the  world,  or  earth,  was  given,  and  which  did  almost  in- 
clude the  Catholic  church.  This  council  was  assembled  by  oriler  of  <««««»- 
MMT  at  Nice,  a  city  of  Biihynia,  about  the  monlh  of  July,  in  tbe  ye«r3^,  la 
the  second  year  of  Constaiitiue's  reign.  St.  Sylvester  was  then  bishop  w  «o^ 
who  sent  thither  Victor  and  Vinceotius,  his  legates.  It  is  commonly  held  that 
Ihb  couacil  consisted  of  318  bishops;  but  those  who  were  prwent  at  it  do  not 
precisely  dttemiiiie  this  number,  but  say  onl?  that  there  were  about  300  bishops. 
Tia  not  caitainly  known  who  presided  in  ihia  oonncil,  but  it  is  verr  probable 
llwt  it  WW  HMOS  who  held  the  chief  place  there  in  hb  own  name,  because  h« 
had  aliedlj  taken  cognizance  of  this  affair,  and  was  much  esteemed  by  the  em- 
peror, who  was  then  present.  _       .      ,   .  i         •  j     .    r   n 

Athaiiatius,  in  his  second  apology,  calls  Hosius  the  father  and  president  of  all 
the  cowirlli.  The  name  of  this  bishop  is  the  first  in  all  the  subscriptions.  Alex- 
aiader  was  much  esteemed,  as  appears  by  the  letter  of  the  council.  l!Aistatliius. 
of  Antioch,  was  called  the  chief  bishop  of  the  council  by  Proclus  and  by  lacun- 
dua;  but  it  is  more  probable  that  Hosius  presided  there  in  his  own  nanie.  and  not 
in  the  pope's,  for  he  no  where  assumes  the  title  of  legate  of  the  holy  see;  and 
none  of  the  ancients  say  that  he  presided  in  this  council  in  the  pope  s  name. 
OelaiiusCiMceims.  who  first  affirmed  it.  says  it  without  any  proof  or  authority. 

Dm  JPtii,  vol  1,/Jf.  598,  599. 

Now  where  is  the  gentleman's  authority  for  the  nature  of  the  bish- 
op of  Eomio  or  his  legates,  either  calling  or  presiding  in  this  council ! 
lIpoB  tieii  disregard  of  ancient  history  rest  many  such  assertions  now 
in  common  ciroulation  and  in  common  belief.  But  as  I  said  before 
on  this  point,  I  should  not  have  dwelt  a  moment  upon  it,  had  not  my 
opponent  affected  peculiar  accuracy  in  his  details. 

The  bishop  admits  Barronius  to  be  an  authentic  histonan.  Now, 
neither  Barronius  nor  Du  Pin  even  admitted  so  much  in  reference  to 
iie  demerits  of  the  popes,  as  bishop  Pureeli  has  admitted -in  the  pre- 
sence of  this  great  congregation :  For  he  says  "  1  have  no  doubt 
but  these  bad  popes  he  now  expiating  their  crimes  in  the  pen- 
al firoo  of  hell."  While  these  words  were  sounding  in  m¥  ears, 
tho  f  loslioii  simnltaneously  arose,  with  the  sensation  produced,  What ! 
Has  the  Lord  Jesus  his  vicars — his  representatives  on  earth,  now 
roasting  in  the  flames  of  hell  I  I  put  it  to  intelligent  men,  whether 
■loh  an  idea  is  not  repugnant  to  every  principle  of  the  christian  ro- 

ligiiOn.  1 

l¥hen  Simon  proposed  to  purehase  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
what  did  Peter  say  to  him !  "  Thy  money  perish  with  thee !"  Does 
this  look  like  winking  at  such  enormities  !  Were  not  the  apostles 
all  persons  of  unblomished  reputation!  and  if  such  holy  men,  the 


I 


EOMAN   CATHOLrC    HBLIGION. 


159 


I 


models  of  every  virtue,  were  firet  appointed  by  the  Lord  to  condurt 
the  affaire  of  his  kingdom,  how  comes  it  to  pass  that  he  has  changed 
his  administration  ani  trusts  it  to  such  a  succession  of  pretended 
Representatives  1  Has  Christ  changed  his  purpose  with  respect  to 
his  chureh,  that  he  will  allow  its  supreme  head  on  ear  h  ,to«ct  every 
species  of  crime,  and  yet  be  his  acceptable  vicegerents !  May  I  not 
sav,  that  the  darkest  hour  of  midnight  is  not  more  opposed  to  the  light 
of  noon,  than  is  the  general  character  of  the  popes  of  Rome  to  that 

"^•^rg^ntmin  exclaims  "How  precise  these  9?^»»«^i«\:^J«y: 
in  their  dates!"  There  is  however,  an  over  precision,  that  creai^ 
suspicion.  When  a  man  begins  to  swear  very  cireumstantially  before 
his  word  is  called  in  question,  1  begin  to  suspect  his  evidence,  and 
when  I  see  authore  testifying  that  Peter  reigned  twenty  four  years 
five  months  and  ten  days,'bis\op  of  Rome  (as  I  have  it  on  some^ 
Dies  of  the  popes ;)  I  think  he  ought  also  to  come  down  to  hwirs, 
mi^u^s  and  seconds !  and  then  we  would  know  how  to  appreciate  hi^^ 
This  resembles  Peter's  putting  away  his  wife  after  he  bec«ne 
bishop  of  Rome.  «  What  accurecy  1"  Let  the  ^f  "J^^^"™^"  Pjo^  fi's 
that  he  was  bishop  of  Rome,  and  then  we  shall  show  that  he  suil 

'"TT^etemlem^^^^^  citizens  of  Cincinnati,  however 

well  deserved  on  their  part,  will  not  so  blind  the  eyes  of  this  audience 
r»1^a?rrderstand  th^e  argument ;  and  the  design  of  their  pane^nst. 
Nor  will  his  gratuitous  denunciation  of  the  Albigenses,  Donatists, 
Novatians,  Pafucians,  and  others,  pass  for  historic  truth  They  were 
such  "  vile  heretics"  in  the  estimation  of  "  holy  niother,'  as  are  wo 
«  schismatical  Protestants."  Their  reputation  we  have  fully  sustain- 
ed from  unexceptionable  authority. 

The  genUeman  will  have  Du  Pin  m  every  speech.  Can  he  prove, 
or  has  L  proved  him  unfaithful  in  stating  a  single  historic  fact  1  Not 
one.    Nofcan  he  disprove  Oiose  Roman  Catiiolic  vouchere  for  him 

on  whose  testimony  1  rely.  *      j  -.  i  «,«  «*.*  «!». 

Bat  as  the  reiteration  of  assertion  is  no  proof,  and  as  I  am  not  ob- 

liffed  to  repeat  arguments  as  often  as  he  makes  assertions,  1  shall 

nStice  one  or  two  new  mattere  to  which  he  ;^««^/£^«  ^^"^P^^^^I^k^d 
But  it  is  thne  to  examine  the  philosophy  of  the  plea  for  wicked 
popes.   The  Messiah  descended  through  a  long  line  of  an«f«^«;!;«^™J 
Sf  whom  were  wicked  men.  That  is,  tTie  human  "f  »f  ,°^^^« '^^.^^"^ 
descended  through  some  wicked  progenitore.  I°/f  *  !    Po  the  ho^^^^^ 
of  Jesus  Christ,  be  it  said,  he  humbled  himself  for  our  exaltation 
he  condescended  to  be  made  of  a  woman,  to  be  descended  ^om  Adam, 
NoSrand  othere.    In  such  a  long  line,  he  «^««^  "«^^««*"*/' ^"^^ 
had  ail  tiie  varieties  of  human  natnre  in  his  \»f  «^«f '     "^/jf^^^^ 
to  make  himself  of  no  reputation— to  be  bom  m  a  stable,  of  the  hum- 
West  and  poorest  parentage.   Bm  who  would  argue  f^om  ^J"f  U^^^^ 
because  his  flesh  and  blood  were  so  descended ;  .^^f^^^f^/^'/^^^^^^^^ 
Spirit  must  descend  to  the  chureh,  in  all  its  official  gifts  of  authority 
and  governmental  influence,  through  a  lineage  of  P^^f "«' ^,h««2n«  Jh 
were^uU  of  murder,  adultery  and  all  »l"«V'T'''l'."nl^mis^^^^^^^ 
the  hands  of  such  persons  all  the  graces  of  the  <>!;d»"f "^f,  ™"«^  J^ 
to  all  the  partakers  of  the  christian  institution  !  »««?  "<>^^J  "^  *?! 
tSedefence  make  the  matter  woree  1  Is  there  any  analogr  between ti^ 
descent  of  flesh,  and  tho  Spirit  of  God!    Is  the  formaUon  of  tiio 


r 


i 


UMIATK  OH  'THM 

bod|,  iBd  tlie  cietlion  of  th«  myitictl  body  of  Christ,  mttten 

of  oqml  w&m  wad  iMportanoe  t       ,        ^  •     n  .u^  -«.;«- 

God  has  geneiillj,  employed  tho  host  of  our  race  in  all  the  affiura 
of  our  salvation.  His  agents  have  often  heen  angels  or  Uie  OeH  men. 
Me  did  not  often  impart  such  sacred  trusts  to  men  of  bad  character. 
A  wicked  Balaam  or  a  treacherous  Judas  may  have  been  amongst 
those  employed,  for  special  reasons  in  some  great  crisis.  In  the  case 
of  Balaam,  he  caused  even  an  ass  to  open  its  mouth  and  reprove  Uie 
madness  of  the  prophet:  but  that  he  ever  set  such  persons  over  his 
chiicbt  aid  gave  the  affairt  of  his  kinedom  into  such  hands— that 
lie  went  so  far  as  to  select  these  wicked  popes  to  speak  his  word, 
it  npiifiMiit  to  aU  history,  and  our  experience  of  his  dealings  wilh 

men 

The  ffentleman  says  there  were  lioo  hundred  goad  popes.  I  do  not 
■dmit  this :  but  I  am  wUling  to  help  him  so  for  as  to  say  I  can  count 
/orff  fitn«  saints  out  of  the  lial^f  popes  according  to  my  calendar, 
iil  they  lived  long  ago.  Not  one  of  the  last  fifty  has  been  a  saint— 

Bnaor  PotciLii— ~Yes  there  is  one. 

Mil  Camtoill— I  beg  the  gentleman's  pardon.  There  is  one  saint 
liiMi,  out  of  the  last  fifty  popes !  It  is  a  happy  thing  for  human  na- 
ture,  that  the  vices  and  faults  of  those  who  have  redeeming  qualities, 
die  with  them,  while  their  virtues  live  and  magnify,  long  alter  then 
death.  .  Hence,  our  remote  ancestors  and  thoae  of  ancient  times,  if  ^ 
all  distinguished,  are  canoniied  In  the  admiration  of  the  living,  and 
are  supposed  greatly  to  excel  our  contemporaries. 

The  bishop  says,  that  if  the  pope  were  a  poor  wandererin  the 
mountains  of  the  moon,  it  would  not  destroy  his  authority.--Thou|h 
the  see  of  SL  Peter  should  be  vacant  for  seventy  years !  If  so,  the 
whole  argument  for  Roman  episcopacy  falls  to  the  ground.  If  the  gen- 
iieman  admits  that  the  pope  has  as  much  authority  in  the  mountains 
of  the  moon  as  in  Rome,  why  all  this  controversy  about  Rome  I 

The  gentleman  made  himself  very  merry  with  the  council's  depos- 
log  three  popes  and  creating  a  fourth.  But  I  repeat,  there  were  in  all 
four  popes  created  and  destroyed  at  that  one  time.  I  feel  no  mis- 
givings of  conscience  for  making  this  asserUon.  I  a«k  now,  how  are  we 
5)  decide  which  of  these  four  had  the  best  title  to  Sl  Peter  s  chair  I 
Where  is  the  authority  for  a  council's  creating  one  and  destroying  three 
popes  !  No  council  before  ever  took  so  much  on  them.  But  if  we 
•ay  with  the  bishop,  that  not  one  of  the  three  popes  was  a  true  popej 
then  what  a  long  link  is  wanliiig  in  the  succession ;  and  how  could 
the  council  of  Constance  furnish  it  I 

My  friend  the  bishop  spoke  of  marriage  quite  in  jocular  style—:  but 
he  told  one  great  truth  wMch  I  hope  he  will  stick  to,  to  the  end.  It  was 
this:  He  said  that  ike  dlureA  kad  made  marriage  one  of  the  Mven 
sacraments— mark  it.  Tke  ekwrek  has  made  it  a  sacrament;  and  she 
liaa  made  other  things  sactanieats :  wMch  the  great  unlveraal  Father 
#f  heaven  and  earth  has  not  so  made  and  dealgialed. 

Peter  was  sent  to  convert  the  Gentllea. — ^He  opened  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  to  Cornelius  and  his  femily :  but  this  does  not  interfere 
wilh  his  being  specially  the  apostle  of  the  Jews. 

There  were  various  vacancies  in  the  Roman  see  of  shorter  and 
longer  duration— several  of  two  or  three  years'  continuance,  rhe 
chureh  was  often  witliout  a  head  lor  years  at  a  time. 

Was  it  the  intention  of  the  great  Anthor  of  the  christian  inMituUon 


BOHAN   CATHOLIC    KOTJGION. 


155 


to  hiiiaid  iiich  a  contingency!  Would  he  J'^ '^^,?^  ^^^."^i^ 
to  li»^iaiu  wrcii-  chair  often  vacant  and  often  filled  withvncked 

"^•^  ''^Knl^il^riLrcrcouW  gel  along  for  years  without  a  pope, 
P%'u?ot^Ultew^^^^^  Fof  if  faith  in  the  pope 

could  »tno*5^P®"^f^",A//Wi7A  would  Jesus  Christ  have  suflfered 
be  an  essential  part  of  '^V^'f^P^'^f  salvation  to  be  so  often  and 
the  whole  -<^«^»":.™^/j^/^^^^^  and  died  durin. 

80  long  «"«l?^"?«i- i^^^^^^'lLr were  detained  in  purgatory;  an3 
rcSSnle^^^^^^^^^  by  thLTnavoidable 

Interruptions!— [Time  expired.] 

Twelve  o^chdc^  M» 

Bishop  Purcell  risesr—  -  ,     #m  .v  it*  feui,  «nil 

The  auestioB  for  UndaT  is  the  uniformity  of  the  Catho  ic  feiA  and 
me  «l"e™°°  •"'        if,  the  subject  of  apostolicity.    Mr.  y. 

practice ;  and  we  »"  «'»  "P°"  ^fieipaied.    He^  has  discovered  that 

of  arms,  and  ne  laKes  up  wim  wi^  »  .     latter,  as  he  is  a 

dington  have  said  a  good  word.    Well  l«^^^f  ®JT 'holic  testimo       p. 

SsHTthe^SreC'^uVtXutlfa^^ 

Donatisu  and  P'«'«t"r''ru^*oWi^d    hfir  derw  »X  p~r  InS 
rim    "  while  they  (the  Vaudois)  obliged  tneir  ciergj  '^    •"     , 
todustrirus.  they  compelled  them  to  be  illilcraU  also."   This,  at  least, 

%™1'l«etC"tand  dreamed  for  two  nights  on  the  subject  of 
He  says,  l  nave  s'^i:' »  ,        :jj„„  ;„  the  name  of  Sylvester, 

my  testimony.  «7?f ™'"B ^^^LPej  nit  Already  produced  Baronius. 
rndtavTril^brnfoftf.^^^^^^ 

rn  tha"tte"4s^o„'  »'"  W^ 'J  ^tl^rmf  S  s  ^s^iJ 
of  learning  in  that  age,  in  the  East.    Why,  when  my  ir  , 

he  admits  ril,  Mmjelf,  and  '«=''««  ™«"°^f;"^'o!»J;^«^'^^„ 
fourth  century  was  the  gMden  fg^^^stbrt^n  the  East,  and  if  he  will 
"""^\Tal^'hTwilffi^d  tKe«  has'"r^rely  been  presented  to 

\^^"viT^:'''^tZ^}^^^^'^  -y  ^-  victo' '»- 

Vincentius..were  legates  of  »/  Iff  •  ,  complete  effect  to  their 

To  give  more  ■;»'«■"»%  "^tefw^rWrnTto^^^  Arianism 
decision,  the  bishops  of  the  ^"'"f''?"  T°"  „,  A,-  divinity  of  Chris^ 
and  establish  *^  B«»«>  "'"''JjtfSe  wL  Ae«Tbit\e  acknow- 
which  the  Arians  impugned,  '^""**?»"^^3hor^  We  hear  of  no 
ledged  the  disUnctness  '^^J^^^^^^^^l^^TZii^^  bishops, 
collision  between  him  and  »?  J*^'- " '1^  °y  h„t  as  it  was  freely 
The  church  «»i^,X  t«d.  The"^  we«  no'".lLs,  rail-roads^ 
given.  It  was  gratefully  accepieo.  •  l^'  munificence,  the  fathers 
Sr  housls  in  those  days.  In  *««">?«'?'  LZ?,  denied  them.  To 
of  Nice  found  tho^e  resources  which  their  poverty  oeniw. 


I 


I 


1 


''.laiATB   ON   THR 


*| 


lit  Ml  C®«ileitfes,  it  wit,  howew,  ihu  Otma  fearlessly  said,  "  Da 

lot  iitmlM*  in  acclsiiastital  matters,  for  to  you  God  gave  the  empire ; 
but  to  OS  teeletlMtiiial  concerns.  Now  as  he  who  should  deprive  you 
of  your  kingdom  would  resist  the  ordinance  of  God,  so  do  you  bowait 
lent  yom  fill  into  some  grievous  sin  by  taking  away  the  indepeii- 
dbmoe  of  the  church* 

My  lewmed  friend  says  he  will  not  go  further  on  these  matters.  It 
is  well— 4lscretion  is  the  better  part  of  valor.  The  voice  of  all  anti- 
fulty  has  spoken— The  authority  of  Rome  has  ever  stood  preemi* 
nent. 

I  did  not  say,  /  did  tud  doubt  these  popes  were  in  hell.  I  beg  the 
genlliiiiai  to  quote  m®  currectly.  Far  be  it  from  me,  to  arrogate  a 
right  which  belongs  to  God  alone,  to  decide  on  man's  eternal  destiny 
*-but  I  said,  ItkmM  mi  be  mrpmed^  at  it,  when  I  consider  their  de- 
Ibeis  and  sins  on  the  one  hand,  their  knowledge,  responsibility  and 
grace,  on  the  other.  The  more  eminent  their  station,  the  more  con- 
spicuous to  the  whole  world,  like  spots  on  the  sun,  were  their  frail- 
ties—the  brighter  the  example  of  their  predecessors,  the  darker,  by 
contrast,  did  they  appear.  But  the  circumstances  of  the  times  in 
which  they  lived,  must  be  taken  into  the  account  to  palliate,  if  truth  will 
not  permit  us  to  excuse,  their  failings.  The  ItBhtM  and  thadowa  are 
blended,  perhaps  necessarily,  in  the  moral  as  well  as  in  the  physical 
world  ;  and  as  we  do  not  deny  the  existence  of  an  infinitely  wise  and 
good  God,  because  we  discover  apparent  imperfection  in  the  material 
world,  the  volcano,  the  poison,  the  venomous  reptile,  the  whirlwind, 
the  pestilential  malaria,  so  neither  do  we  conclude  that  religion,  or  the 
church,  is  not  his  work,  because  we  sometimes  meet  with  examprles  of 
moral  deformity  and  disorder  which  mar  the  beauty  of  the  heavenly 
design.  But  Mr.  C.  thinks  that  God  would  never  allow  men  whom 
he  had  selected  for  the  high  function  of  Roman  Catholic  popes,  to  fall 
into  sins  that  would  merit  for  them  hell-fire.  Does  he  then  forget  that 
God  created  Lucifer,  as  a  bright  leader  of  the  angelic  throng,  and  yet 
LiciliBr  is  now  a  reprobate  spirit  in  hell  ?  Does  he  forget  that  Judas 
was  selected  to  share  in  the  infallibility,  which  he  allows  was  granted 
to  the  twelve !  Did  not  Jesus  train  him  up  in  his  own  school  for  three 
years!  And  did  not  Judas,  after  all,  betray  his  God  and  sell  him  for 
the  thirty  pieces  of  silver!  Did  he  not  afterwards  go  and  hang  him- 
self  in  despair,  and  his  bowels  gushed  out.  Was  it  not  because  of  the 
eBcess  of  lit  own  favor  to  Judas,  and  the  inconceivable  ingratitude  of 
tlie  apostle,  that  the  Son  of  God  had  said  by  the  mouth  of  his  prophet : 
Ps.  liv.  14.  *•  If  my  enemy  had  reviled  me,  I  would  verily  have  borne 
with  it,  and  if  he  that  hated  me,  had  spoken  great  things  against  me, 
I  would  perhaps  have  hidden  myself  from  him :  btd  ikmh  a  num  cfom 
atfMl,  mv  ,gmde  mnd  my  famiUor,^  This  is  what  makes  a  priest's, 
or  a  biahop*i  sin  so  great  This,  awful  as  it  is,  is  what  sustains  us 
when  scandals  befall  the  church,  when  the  lights  of  the  sanctuary  are 
eclipsed  and  its  pillars  broken  and  scattered  on  the  earth,  for  we  say 
to  ourselves  Christ  has  allowed  all  this  beforehand  in  that  miniature 
band,  his  own  apostles — ^the  exemplar  of  his  church  :  and  the  number 
^  had  me*  hm  not  yet  equalled  ike  pmporiiim  ff  one  to  twelve  !  God 
has  allowed  all  this  to  teaeh  us,  that  if  men  fall  away,  the  faith  for 
which  his  holy  promises  are  pledged,  is  invincible.  *'  The  gifle  (fGod 
mewithuuit^pmlame^  Rom.xi.&,  in  other  wonls,  Christ  established 


■OMAN  CAWOUC   WMJ6I0N.  ^^7 

eessore  of  Peter  are  b«d  men ;  the  ■"•r?' "    beha»e8  b»d  W,  it  U  for 

•"K  {iL^^t^ptea  to  .how  *at  *h- ^p^ toTl  ^Z.  tS 
.nceetry  of  ChrUandAesuocess^ofS^e^^  ^^  ^^^ 

if  the  mnceslry  of  Judah  •»?»''»*'  ^^  p^^j  had  many  and  great 
tined  to  be  the  forerunner  of  Hun, oJ  whom  ram  j         s^ 

Sing,  and  hard  to  be  "'^«»*^/.';^rtlT'a^sK  .Secession,  i. . 
of  tSe  worst  smnem,  why  «  g**'  "?*  ^uahuo  holy  as  He  to  whom 
_i.ii.)iwsu>  individually  or  collectively,  nougni  BO  iioijr"     .u  ,l.  _i^ 
Sf  Ae  p^iieu  bore  vAtne..,  in  whom  was  seen  on  earth.  aU  the  gi<K 

''l"'  f'te-^f  cLCof'Ma™ht'  where  the  temporal  genera- 

•  '  ^l^^,^L  tSfrom  David,  and  my  arFimenl  is  thui ;  th^ 

toon  of  *»<•  f?"»^'Li'!^g;Sty  of  Jesus  to  come  according  to  the 

u  It  ha.  not  impaired  »ne  sancuij  ui  -,v._,  „ho  sinned  a.  he 

fcd..  from  him.  ''l^t^}f.''Tf^^ff„^J'^^iCliii>^  office  of 
h»l  rinned,  «.  neither  did  •\,^';»!*  ^."n^e  nSer.  The  cas- 
pope,  that  there  were  some  bad  men  ?f  °»8  »«  P"^  ,  ^  », 

^**'"f'^':SiThow'.wr"0h  'r Sr^h  of  the°nW  and  of 
may  exclaim  ^th  »  holy  awe—wn .  u.  v  incomprehensible  are 
the  knowledge,  of  the  wisdom  of  God!     »»«'  "«^P    ^alh  known 

his  judgmente.  and  how  »"««?'P»'»»''tu^nZ«lior«    St  Paul,  Bom. 

the  mild  of  God,  or  who  hath  been  >"«  coanseUor^    vM  r 

«.  33,  34.  My  friend  says  ^hat  ho^y  men  were  al>^y.«>l^y^^ 

Holy  Ghost  for  holy  P-^^^f ;„ ^  ^ri  Jonv,  hi^lf  to  have  beer 
proves,  a.  I  can  show  by  his  owri  «f  •'"'""y'  vSTfolio-a  Daniel 

r' Vi.  ra.lSrf™^«*'»nd  a  hfrd  heaV  But  1  wUl  no. 
J^k  ofltAer  nor  of  Calvin,  "arf.  »nle».^-P«^<t  firet  fifty, 
•^e  gentleman  say.  there  ''"^ .^f-TJ^ZnZT  Since  that,  theVe 
1  «ud  .Sere  were  39  who  ^J^^^'^^,::^C^r^i^il  the  vir- 
have  been  many  pontiffs,  saints.  J'"^ '?«  "^  P  go  did  his  predeces- 
lues  which  may  entiUe  ""^  ^  be  so  cons^ered.  ^ii._So 

«,r  PioB  VI.  «.  did  BSP'-J'^'Jiy-Z  o^e^  morals,  profound  hnmil. 
doe.  the  present  ponuff,  a  «*» jf,  *°^'^f|  "we  have  heard  many 
Ity.  enligWned  »«/'  f  *  JS  "    *f  Kmporal  inflaence  in  Rome, 

thority  does  not  reside  m  the  stones,  ana  oocils  a      ^ 

"^^l  gentleman  speak,  o[  *«  «f^- /"-^f  ffiuffaU?  ^W 
ftink.  that  if  the  pope  *oud  lea- R^ne  Ae^Cath^  ^^  ^ 

be  anmhilated.    ^  d^s  not  mow  of  a  ree  to  pensh. 

follow  the  pope.    \Ve  "«»"  «"f"  f^re  it  has.  once,  been  established 
If  Christianity  forsake  a  country,  ^^^^ ^^'J^Z^^^,  learned  and 

the  name,  of  the  sees  ^'>f^^^"'JX\^llXt^^^^^^<^c^'^  •"^^S' 
piou.  Coadjutor-b,*opofPhaade  Ph.^^  p,,||. 

nation  from  Arath  in  fartibu*  tnpdtltum.     i  ne  uun  r 


i 


I 


lis  IIMA«   on   TEl 

tMiiiii  it  liliiia  fiom  his  front  ugB.    The  bisliop  of  Bawlsiown  m 
■itoi  nominally,  bishop  of  a  foreifii  oee. 
Now  lot  no,  once  for  all,  «ay  that  mj  friend  has  seYoral  times  mia- 

lakei  mj  ▼iews  and  words,  on  the  suoject  of  appointment  to  offloe. 
I  need  not  repeat  what  I  have  said  on  that  subject.  We  do  nothing 
wiiMiil  tlie  pope's  concurrence  and  sanction,  in  spiritual  matters. 
This  MUHMiiiion  is  a  peculiar  trait  in  oar  church.  We  exult  In  it. 
It  keeps  us  together  as  the  sheen  of  one  fold.  "  He  who  gaiherclli 
IMI  with  me  scattereih,"  saith  the  Lord.  By  this  communion  with 
the  see  of  Peter,  we  know  that  the  church  is  orthodox  a<id  sound. 
On  this  account  we  yield  all  due  deference  to  the  ^pe«  On  this  ac« 
eounl  we  ask  of  him  the  "  cauonical  investiture,"  which  signifies  that  a 
person  is  authorized  by  him  to  be  made  bishop,  and  inducted  into  the 
iiered  office  by  his  authority. 

We  were  told  that  councils  met  together  and  elected  popes.  There 
%  nothing  extraordinary  in  tliis.  Why,  my  dear  friends,  com.non  sense 
teaches  Uiis  oourse.  Christ's  foreknowledge  of  all  the  ocourrences 
that  were  to  take  place  in  the  government  of  the  earth,  caused  him  to 
iMIgMllae  society.  If  not,  disorder  would  ensue.  On  such  a  principle 
■•  the  gentlenianX  there  could  be  no  common  bond  of  union.  If  Christ's 
■oeiety  in  the  world  and  men  will  not  consent  to  be  held  together  by 
■octal  rules,  his  design  is  baffled.  The  church  is  a  society.  Hence 
St.  Paul  says,  "Let  every  soul  be  subject  to  the  higher  powers,  for 
they  who  resist,  purchase  for  themselves  damnation."  Rom.  xiii.  I. 
Again,  "  Remember  your  prelates  who  have  spoken  to  you  the  word 
m'EhA ;  whose  faith  follow,  considering  the  end  of  their  conversation.'* 
£ai  again  *♦  obey  your  prelates,  and  be  subject  to  them.  For  they 
wateh  as  being  to  render  an  account  of  vour  souls,  that  they  may  do 
tils  with  joy  and  not  with  grief.  For  this  is  not  expedient  for  you." 
Heh.  xili.  17.  Without  suboroination  there  can  be  no  peace,  and 
MMefiwiitly  DO  happiness,  in  anjr  society  of  men,  but  parUcularly  in 
ft  saiigioiia  loeietY.  The  church  is  the  pillar  and  the  ground  of  tha 
troth,  Isl  Tim.  iii.  15.     [Time  expired.] 

TAreeo'cibcAt  J*.Jf. 

pfPr  Cmmwbmul  rif«s— 

Beibis  the  third  proposition  is  read,  I  beg  leave  to  offer  both  an  ez- 
]^MHition  and  an  apology. 

Ii  reference  to  the  preposition  which  has  just  been  discussed,  1 
have  lying  before  me  an  index  of  the  popes  from  the  time  of  Peter  to 
Innocent  lI.  A.  D.  1676.  Here  are  two  hundred  and  forty  po|>es.  In 
the  first  fifty,  forty-nine  were  saints.  We  notice  a  diminution  in  sanc- 
tity at  we  descend  to  our  own  times ;  for  in  the  last  ninety  popes  on 
the  list,  there  is  only  one  saint  The  church  made  her  own  saints. 
She  ought,  therefore,  to  know  the  reason  why.  It  rests  in  her  own 
jndgnieQt :  but,  in  my  judgment,  she  has  made  in  her  popes  as  many 
•s,  in  any  decency,  she  possibly  could ;  and  many  more  in  name  than 
■he  even  had  in  reality. 

The  pntleman  (and  it  was  one  of  his  most  lucky  hits)  compares  the 
Ihet  linl  there  was  one  traitor  among  twelve  apostles,  to  the  fact,  that 
there  were  illy  had  popes  amnn^  two  or  three  hundred  popes.  This 
it  a  haopy  salvo.  Judas  has  relieved  many  a  hard  case ;  but  the  con- 
Jnet  or  Judas  is  no  apology  for  the  popes.  It  baa  another  meaning  it 
■eripture,  than  to  justify  or  excuse  such  flagitious  eases.    The  Savior 


BOMAN   CATHOLIC    KBLI6ION. 


19^ 


y™  Will  ^member,  in  hi.  p»yer  (John  x^i.). -JT^  ir^^^^X  *:^ 

spoken  of  in  the  Old  'f»"™*°'' "'",_-„  j„i_  appreciated.    But  for 
J^M  among  the  t»eWe,  is  not  riways  auiy  »P^  ^^ 

him,  as  respects  the  cred.bmty  of  the  «»'™^y;^*f3  ^cM,t; 
said,  that  the  twelve  apwU^  '^""j'Srir  testimony  was  that 
and.  althoogh  persons  »f.  ^' "P  tiS^'^^irto^S^ke  U  perfect  in  e»ery 
of  friends.  To  prevent  th  s  «fl»««^'  '  „Mant  of  Jesus,  as  much  as 
•*'"*  "^  7Z'jr  K.dnS't^l  t*^llX  l^^reu  of  the'  scheme,  of 
r  Zm-  n-ucVa^'hTs  other  -W.fr  Ye^nXXr! 
wretch,  and  sells  hi.  master  for  «««!"  ^""Y*-  \o',he  hW.  priest, 
Tiction  of  his  guilt,  «<te'/ l'">t„'«"«^f';-.  J'lCebetraye''  '■'»»««»' 
t?L""'  TOs"^TthV2S:,  "^rr !;i«>nms«nU  is=[he  best  te. 
ft  of^e%welve!    It  was  essential  to  *«  ««"f  "^^sf  ^ 

ZiJm  .gainst  the  i-X^^i^/^ttf' C^sSy,  a^a^^^^  »f 
Judas  is  as  much  a  maj^  ^„?1,*"„*  ^  hu  own  honor,  but  to  th. 
hi.  companion. :  a  '^'^^I'^'f^'  J'J  ^""^r  of  the  chrisiian  faith, 
blameless  reputation  of  the  author  a""  J™™"  •  that  case.  But, 
Thi.,  then,  "P'ains  the  reason  of  such  a  p^m^o".""!**^^^^^     ^^ 

hearken  to  the  sequel.  To  P«ven  a  »>«•  »~  »^?"";"g  to'^cast  lots-to 
allowance  even,  the  Lord  «"Bg««'ffJ°to  Wa^Xa,  t^  might  not 
appeal  to  heaven  in  electing  a  «"<^*f'"  *f/"^ue  and  that  he  might 
bS  endangered  in  the  reputauon  of  """^''"^"^^fXis  character  to 
be  sent  from  God.    To  have  pemitted  J«.reoM  o^^ 

stand  forward  in  the  front  "''V^*^  W'  *° "J^  ,„  the  plan  and 
the  cause.  The  delinquency  ?f*e  popes  is  OPPJ^  »  P  ^  ^ 
government  of  ^echnst.^^^^^^^ 

^^u^^Tct'il  w^ril.  Wumphed  ere  now.    Thi.  is  tt.  «y^ 

nation,  ,«-¥♦;«  fnr  the  difficulties,  which  our  worthy 

Now,  for  the  apology.    J^  .f„  J°J^^^^^^  the  bishops  of  Rome, 

friend  had  to  encounter  in  ^"^^l^^^^^ZVx^^^  a  part  Jf  this  book, 
that  we  offer  an  apology.  /^^^*Pf ''f/^^'Slve  not  leisure  to  trace  the 
for  the  sake  of  a  particular  class,  who  Have  noi  iei»u 

causes  of  these  things.  »•««„«  :„  KAKalf  of  Peter's  having  had 

The  bishop  couldfind  «>*^'^l^^^l^iZ  which  th!t «» 
the  see  of  Rome;  because  »'».VT".^'"  **  g^j  have  had  plenty  of 
first  claimed  the  auprem^  =^e  ancie'nTand  Uue  ^onnd  of  ascribing 
old  traditions  to  sustain  it.    T"*.  """'*"„„  ,„j  -.fhis  arro<ratine  an* 

U,  the  bishop  of  Rome  ^JP*""  {"'"'^rC  hU  s^  «a^       '"P- 
««ofsuperiontyo».roA»tashopsj^was^J*atn^  ^^  ^^^ 

riJ  city:  '>»'}>^'^''JZ""oX^ra'I"poiis  of  the  empire,  th. 
Home  was  mistress  of  the  woria,  me  v  moreover, 

great  city,  the  emperor  .  residence    ^»»« JJ'^5°P  ° „b,e afocese ;  and 

Kd  the  Richest  church  in  the  ''»''*• '^"~'TfS,^id  he  to  him- 
being  neighbor  to  the  emperor,  he  became  proud  •  J*^.^'" 

^X(S  As'the  «™PS"7°"'"  M;tpr"nfthe  a;,s-u;iic  tree^ 

V.^^tt^me%S««£ifm^^^^^ 


IP 


ROMAN   CATKOUC    EWJOION. 


lei 


.TX  ON  THB 


m 


im 

tvwii  iM  md  iKm  Il<mie*  Soon  there  are  two  empires  (for  the  empire 
was  ditiilod),  on«  of  tho  oast,  md  one  of  the  west.  1  here  must  be, 
now,  two  peat  imperial  bishops;  and  the  east  and  west  churches,  or, 
tte  Owok  and  Roman,  began  to  feel  the  spirit  of  rival  agipndizement. 
TlMMWlrofOi»¥  began,  and  the  prospects  of  the  new  city  outnvaled 
tiMio  of  tlio  old  city.  But,  just  as  the  sceptre  and  mitre  were  about 
ptttinf  fiom  Rome  to  Constantinople,  some  ingenious  person,  whose 
kme  no  monumont  records,  thought  of  a  happy  expedient  to  save  the 
■inking  fortunes  of  the  eternal  city.  It  was,  that  Peter  and  Paul  had 
fouiided  Hie  church  of  Rome :  nay,  thai  Peter  and  Paul  were  buried 
,1 


Cowstanlina,  the  empress  of  the  east,  at  the  close  of  the  sixth  cen- 
tury, finding  that  this  discovery  was  unfortunate  to  the  rising  majesty 
of  the  ea«t,  tent  an  express  to  Rome  to  obtain  the  remains  of  Paul,  and 
have  them  conveyed  to  Constantinople.  She  was  willing  that  Peier 
■hMiM  leniain  in  the  Lateran ;  but  she  wished  to  possess  Paul,  bbe 
liinigit  thik  would  equaliie  the  preteosions  of  new  Rome  and  old 
Rome,  and  give  her  equal  claims  upon  the  devotion  of  the  saints  and 
pilgrims  of  the  church.  Had  it  not  been  for  her  failure  in  this  strata- 
gem, no  one  can  tell  whether  Rome  had  not  :>een,  ages  since,  like 
Thebes  or  Babylon.    On  this  subject,  thus  speaks  the  elegant  Gibbon : 

"  Like  Thebes,  or  Babylon,  or  Cartlia^e.  the  name  of  Rooie  mi^t  have  been 
m9md  (mm  the  earth,  if  the  city  had  not  been  animated  bv  a  vital  principl«» 
Iffhidhagain  restored  her  to  honor  and  doiiiinroa.  A  vague  tradition  waa  embraced 
that  two  Jewish  teacher*,  a  tent-maker  and  a  iihemian,  had  formerly  been  eie 
cnled  im  tha  circus  of  Nero,  and  at  the  end  of  five  hundred  vear»  their  genuinj 
or  fictitioiit  wsliei  were  adored  as  the  palladium  of  christian  Rome.  Decl.  and 
Fall  Rom.  Emp.  Vol,  viii.  p.  161-  .      «  ^  ^i. 

^^JimgmiradiUon,'^  This  is  happilj  expressed.  But  the  sopenor 
laet  of  St.  Gregory  saved  Rome  from  this  misfortune ;  and  he  managed 
the  petition  of  Constantina  with  flfreat  address,  as  we  shall  presently 
■how.    I  hog  leave  to  read  from  Waddington : 

Revirmce  fit  Relics.  The  empress  Constantia,  who  was  building  a  chnfch 
■t  CoiMtwitinople  to  St.  Paul,  niMle  application  to  Cjrcgory  for  the  head  of  that 
Apottb/  or  at  least  for  aonie  prtion  of  bis  body.  The  pope  berins  his  answer 
bfi  verv  polite  expression  of  his  sorrow  •  that  he  neither  could  nor  dared  to 
mnt  tlMit  iavor;  for  the  bodies  of  th«  hol^  apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  are  so 
rapltadMit  with  miracles  and  terriic  prwligies  lu  their  own  churches,  that  no 
oiwaw  approach  them  without  great  awe,  even  for  the  purpose  of  adoring  them. 
When  my  predacessor,  of  happy  memory,  wished  to  chanre  some  silver  arma- 
ment which  was  placed  over  the  most  holy  body  of  St.  Peter,  though  at  the 
distanco  of  ahnost  fifteeii  feet,  a  wMmiuf  of  no  sniall  torror  •pP««'«a  **>  «'»«• 
■van  I  inyself  wished  to  make  some  alteration  near  the  most  holy  body  of  bt. 
Pkul,  and  it  wis  necessary  t%dig  rather  deeply  near  his  tomb.  The  sopenor  of 
the  place  found  some  bones  which  were  not  at  all  connected  with  that  tomb ;  and 
haviag  presumed  to  disturb  and  remove  them  to  some  other  place,  he  was  v>«ited 
lir  e«rtain  fcarfiil  apprittoas,  mi  4mA  suddenly.  My  predeceMor,  of  boty 
»if ,  alio  undertook  to  make  ioaia  repairs  near  tha  tomb  of  St  Laurenco: 
were  digging  without  knowing  precisely  where  the  venerable  body  was 
ih ih«v  happened  to  open  his  sepulchre.  The  monki  and  guardians  who 
.  at  the  work,  only  because  they  bad  seen  the  hodj  of  that  martyr,  though 
HMivdid  not  presume  so  much  as  to  touch  it,  all  died  witbin  ten  days;  tothceMl 
ihet  BO  man  might  remain  in  life  who  had  beheld  the  body  of  that  just  aiaa. 

•  Haroaias,  who  cites  tlM  po|»'t  lefly  with  eonsiileralile  admtration.  attribat««  the  em 
Mass's  ejuirbilaot  request  to  eccleiiiastical  amliiiioii,— to  a  desire  to  eisli  ihe  see  or  Con 
■taniiUiMlelaa  level  with  tlist  uf  Rowe.  hy  latiiiif  Into  tor  !«••«•*«••• '!^P"P*'"J_i^. 


AiiKjI^gM.,  jUflr'' 


gieal  aa  aposile.    Pleary  ^mm  Sm  toitW  obitfy'ia  piaof  ibat  the  tron^tr  at 
£>rbiilden  io  tha  Rtunau  ehaieli.  while  that  abase  was  nermilied  in  ibe  cast. 


to  it  than  known  to  yo.,  th^  'iT  0^ -^f^  o'f  Z  M^or^TXe^i^ 
^  reWcB,  not  to  venture ,»«  ••"^J2^P?'i'Jfeh  j^  tJe  hoVbodies; 

X...  piece  oHinen^lk^^^^^  *«  church Vhich. « 

Ihen  It  IS  withdrawn  ami  ">"*  "P.r'r*  "  .^  -roueht  by  t  as  if  the  bodies 
to  be  dedicated,  and  as  «««y  C^'^'^  7«  .t  lI^J^iTtbitintbe  times  of  St. 
tSemaelve.  had  bee.  carrk-l  »hitiier ;  wheuce  ^  J^l^^J;*S'^ed  tb"  virtue  of 
Leo,  (es  we  learn  from  our  ancestors^)  ^»>«»  •««;*  anTcut  X  linen,  and  blood 
iuch  ielics.  that  pope  «"«*  Jj"  *  P"5  ^^^^J"^;!;  b"?  S«>ugh  the  whole  of  the 
flowed  from  the  ricision.  \°^  °«*  **  ~»^?^*^Jf7he^  "W  does  such  te- 
west.  It  is  held  «'".leg.ou.  to  touch  the  l^i^f  the  «««^         ..tonished  at 

verity  ever  rema  n  unpunirfied.  *«r  ^ ^i^^of  the  sainU,  and  we  scarcely 
Ih.  citojn  oj  the  Greek,  to  tjke  jway  ^^^^^^  ^,^  .^  ^,  »»^»7  •P^f*!' 
gif  e  credit  to  it.  But  wnai  ""»"  *  "V  jTtheir  martyrdom,  a  number  of  the 
when  it  is  a  known  fact,  that  a  »^«  *'"V^i^*/;"ejA  had  carried  them  out 
feitl.ful  came  from  the  e«t  <<>,<^»»"»^^""J  .^^^^^^^  S^catacombs,  the  whole 
tf  the  city,  to  the  second  ™«»«»\^"^»  *J,Xf^^^^  of  thunder  aod 

aulUtude  was  unable  to  more  them  farther,— sucn  a  w    p« 

lightning  terrified  aivd  ^j"!^"^^.!^*™-  b_  „„t  .^  the  same  time.  U  with  the  body 
^The  napkin  too,  which  you  ^^'^^^i^!*'^!;*  "Jpproache^^^    But  that  your 
and  cannot  be  touched  more  than  the  P^y/Y^^.TPten  to  send  xo  you  some 
religious  desiit.  may  n<^.be  ^^'^^^''^'''l^.^Ze^^^  if  '»d«*d  » 

part  of  those  chain*  which  St.  Pj^V^gT^hem     Forsiace  many  continually 
Shall  succeed  in  getting  off  any  filings  *~™  "*^":    '  dhiwis  someJmall  portion 

A„/u.»s,  when  t^:ic^!v:^:L:^^ir^*«^^><^y'^ 

be  the  ^r"'' ^yi,t''^VStT™  few  centuries'  .ooner.  my 

Uonary  witnesses,  assuring  us  that  Fetor  was  mane  owa  p 
'1,5fa:^l» tw  rr^a-the  thW  proposiUon.  wfcieh 

.  kio  .«i  »nible  as  any  other  sect  of  philosophy  or  ^"^^^TT^^^^V^  „ 

be  douhted.—  .    ^-onosition,  the  Roman  church  cWras 

To  narrow  the  debat«  on  thw  J'^'P^?'"!^^^  as  resulting 

nnivereal  homage  on  the  P^^^  °f  "^^^^^^1^^  ^^ 

eon  1    No ;  nor  to  »U  indivldaal  V^^J«^^  ^^^ !  The  Pio- 

testaat  church  ts  then  just »»  i"™  "'"'  "V     .  j^  jg  the  fountain  of 
faith  and  moral  code  are  wntten  I"  »  •'^J^'^j  ,«  ^  ask,  what 

all  moral  truth.    We  ""\»  ^fjL.^*^;^^^,^  S  a  fiX<»octriPe,  or 
does  the  gentleman  mean  by /«^?^^««^^      J^  ^^  l,i„, 

opinion  1   It  cannot  f'™"^*!!?^-  iZre  U  the  pre-eminence  ol  tm 
iomethiog  in  the  head  or  heart ;  then,  wnere  w  mi.  r 


Iw 


HBBATB  Oil  THS 


cliireli,  wfioi©  apiDbeft  IndiiidiiJlj  ti»  ill  Mibk  I  wtd  tf  H 

It  mill  m  written  In  iie  creed :  ■g«intJw?«S  ^^'^^r   w 
pteninenee  of  the  Runwn  ehurcli,  over  the  lii|^h  chnrcb  I  for  fiUe 

k  m  wfcllllile  In  hei  cfeed  as  the  Bible  iteelf.       ^.  ^  . ,_, 

The  lenlleniin  eajri,  'thmt  the  eymbol  of  hit  railn  is  mmmtm 
trmd.^  If  that  he  the  elements  of  his  feith ;  all  Protestwrti  Mi^e  it : 
hut  if  he  mewis  doctrine,  opinion,  speculation ;  then  folli*  woiiW  not 
contain  the  differences.  What  is  faith  mdfjedivefy  considered,  butm 
belief  In  tnstiiliiMif,  divine  or  human !  and  what  is  religiows  faith  o(h 
ieeHid^,  iMt  Ae  Bible  I  Five  words  comprehend  the  order  of  thinp 
In  regwd  to  feith :  let  the  fad,  m  the  thing  said  or  dono-3nd  the 
Mibtftf ,  concerning  it— 3rd  the  heMef  of  that  testtmony— 4th  the 
IblfiC,  eonsentaneoua  with  that  faith— and  6th  the  mhmh  correspond. 
Lf  wih  that  leellng«— These  are  the  golden  links,  in  that  dinne  chain, 
which  hinds  onr  hearts  to  God,  and  explains  all  the  mysteries  ofthe 
■Kial  power  of  the  remedial  scheme.  The  gospel  facts,  as  Paul 
sums  them  up,  1  Cor.  xr.  1,  9, 3,  which  engross  the  whole,  are  the 
death,  the  buiial  and  the  resurrection  of  Jesus.  The  whole  Protestant 
world  heliefes  these  fects.  England,  Scotland,  AmericaP-aU  chnsten- 
doni  believe,  or  acknowledge  tiieee  great  gospel  fects.  So  far  nil  are 
«f  one  faith.  The  Romanist  and  Protestant  here,  are  equally  infellible 
as  respects  faith !  And  do  we  not  all  acknowledgje  the  same  perfect 
moral  code  !  But  while  there  is,  indeed,  but  onefmih,  there  are  many 
inoHlMt,  opinions,  and  traditiona;  and  these  are  what  make  the 
« jWJfe**  and  the  **  One  JhtW  of  the  Bible  of  little  or  no  account! 
Honee,  has  not  the  Roman  church,  like  the  Jews,  made  Toid  the  law 
«|  Ctod  by  her  traditions  I  It  is  not  because  the  scriptures  do  not 
eenlain  the  right  faith :  but  because  men  have  chosen  to  add  t«i  it 
folios  of  human  opinions,  that  the  divine  faith  has  lost  "Js  power. 

It  is  a  serious  question,  why  is  the  Roman  church  infelhble  in  faith 
and  not  in  discipline l^n  theory,  and  not  in  practice!  in  the  head, 
and  not  in  the  heart  1— Is  it  not  of  more  value  and  importance,  that 
she  should  be  perfect  in  the  order  and  moral  discipline  of  her  mem- 
bm ;  than  in  the  theory  or  doctrine  of  religion  !  She  found  that  she 
never  could  make  herself  infallibl&— why  then,  does  she  choose  t» 
daia  infellibility  in  the  theory,  and  give  it  up  in  practice  !  Bemuse 
Imt  plea  of  infallibUity  on  that  ground,  she  well  knew,  she  could  not 
at  aU  sustain ;  and  how  well  she  can  sustain  it  on  other  grounds  will 
sppear  in  the  sequel.  She  has  changed  her  discipline  in  every  cen- 
tniy  i  and  her  theories  and  doctrines  of  order  and  government  are  as 
wmms  as  the  Protestant  sects.  In  the  19th  century,  she  is  not  the 
iMMi  !•  in  the  I8th;  nor  in  the  ISth  as  In  the  17th,  nor  in  the  I7th 
an  In  'the  lith,  Ite. 

My  friend  has  made  concessions  here,  which  I  never  expected  from 
Um.  He  has  avowed  principles,  which,  till  within  a  few  yeare,  were 
unknown  in  the  Roman  Catoolic  churoh.  I  look  upon  this  fact  as  an 
evidence,  that  better  days  are  coming.  I  could  wish  that  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic feith,  under  the  mild  genius  of  our  institutions,  might  become  so 
modiied,  as  to  be  suited  to  the  character  of  our  republic ;  especially 
to  abandon  the  absurd  pretension  of  infellibility,  which  indeed,  she 
must  di>,  if  ever  she  can  become  American.  ^        ^ 

Bnt  ths  Roman  church  is  not  united,  nor  uniform  in  this  notion  of 
infellibility.  There  are  four  theories  and  four  parties  on  the  question, 
wkim  tkmll  mfrlUhiiiig  be  fmmif  The  geutieman  believei  that  tha 


XOHAK   CATHOLIC    BBLIOION. 


\m 


0 Ml  is  as  fallible  as  himself.  T^is.  I  conceive,  is  not  Ae  commoa 
ief  amone  Roman  Catholics.  The  Jesuits,  if  I  am  rightly  mtorm- 
ed,  teach  thit  infalUbility  must,  of  right,  be  m  ^^^A^od.  Indeed,  so 
1  should  reason:  for  what  use  would  be  an  infallible  body  under  a 
fallible  head  1  and  would  not  that  be  most  unnatural  \  Is  not  the  body 
subiect  to  the  head,  naturally  and  necessarily  1  and  ought  not  every 
body  political  and  ecclesiastic,  like  the  natural  body,  tol>e  governed 
by  Its  head  1— [Time  expired.] 

Half  poMi  3  o'ehek,  F.  M. 
BraHop  FURCELL  rises— 

I  would  prefer,  for  the  satisfaction  of  the  audience,  and  to  do  Uw 
tubject  justice,  to  enter  at  once  on  the  proposition  of  the  infallibility 
of  the  Church.    I  should  go  over  the  ground,  my  learned  opponent 
has  traveled,  and  if  permitted,  should  make  a  regular  argument  on 
the  subjects  to  which  he  has  alluded.     My  good  fnend  is  dissatisfied 
with  himself  for  having  made  any  concessions  in  favor  of  the  punty 
of  the  popes,  and  he  has  re-examined,  and  found  for  the  last  mnety 
yeare  but  one  saint  in  the  calendar.     If  there  was  hut  one  can- 
onixed,  does  it  follow  that  there  was  but  one  worthy  !   There  were 
many  worthy.    There  have  been  many  great  and  ^ood  men  among 
the  popes  who  have  not  been  canonized.     Rome  is  very  particular 
whom  she  proposes  as  models  for  her  children's  imitation.     She  is 
anxious  that  there  should  be  no  blemish  in  the  splendor  of  holiness, 
no  faded  flower  in  her  coronal.     She  must  be  so  well  assured  by  the 
evidence  of  facts  and  miracles  of  the  eminent  virtue  with  which  U 
has  pleased  God  to  endow  the  subject  whose  life  is  examined  with 
reference  to  this  holy  distinction,  that  she  has  appointed  a  personage  m 
Rome,  called  the  Devil's  Advocate,  whose  duty  it  is  when  a  candi- 
date is  proposed  for  beatification,  to  rake  up  all  he  can  against  htm, 
and  thus  prevent,  not  his  entrance  into  heaven  exactiy,  but  the  admis- 
sion of  his  name  into  the  calendar  of  saints.  So  that,  what  an  illustrious 
Protestant  has  said,  "  it  is  a  miracle  to  prove  a  miracle  at  Rome,    is 
in  fact,  a  proverb  in  the  Ancient  City.  ,11 

Well,  now,  my  friend  says  that  it  was  necessary  that  there  should 
be  a  Judas,— that  he  was  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament^his  is  a 
special  case— unique.  But  my  argument  is  so  strong  on  this  point, 
that  I  will  give  up  even  the  strong  case  of  Judas,  and  yet  prevail. 
Even  Peter,  witii  oaths,  denied  tiie  knowledge  of  his  God  and  Savior 
Jesus  Christ.  The  other  aposties  also  abandoned  him— a  crime,  be 
it  noted,  which  the  Novatians  would  have  never  pardoned.  Ml  this 
was  foretold  as  well  as  the  particular  instance  of  Judas.  {?>o  that,  if 
he  please,  I  will  abandon  this  particular  case,  and  argue  as  follows : 

Peter  fell  and  was  resuscitated ;  the  rest  of  tiie  apostles  fled;  they 
were  ashamed,  or  afraid,  of  being  tiiought  the  disciples  of  Christ. 
They  were  not,  however,  rejected.  The  gifts  of  God  were  without  re- 
pentance in  their  regard,  who  having  seen  and  conversed  with  the 
Word  made  Flesh,  witnessed  his  miracles,  and  beheld  tiie  examp  e 
of  his  virtues,  were,  therefore,  to  human  judgment,  less  excusable 
for  their  desertion  of  tiie  stricken  Shepherd.  Why  may  not,  at  least, 
equal  mercy  be  extended,  if  not  to  tiie  popes,  who  were  in  this  re- 
spect  less  highly  favored,  at  least,  to  the  dMtnne  of  truth  which  the 
aposties,  and  the  popes  were  appointed  to  announce  and  to  preserve 
among  men!    Mubt  God's  holy  law  be  broken  to  pieces,  and  trutb 


194 


DKBArE   OH   TH« 


SOXAlt   CATROLIC    l»LtCION. 


185 


!■, 


p«rid.  Item  th.  «»&,  k«»M;e  ?Ti"I^n9^  "  u'«^nt4f^ 
Uo  bow  to  the  goJden  «J«^  >5'' P?ff!^  J«^^ofGoS, 
Mine  to  l«»e  b«»  specially  ordained  by  the  g^P^'^f'^^i^lS; 
tet  Borne,  once  the  miBtress  of  the  enttre  f "P"  Tf^J'  T™  „<^ 
Sever  the  chief  see  of  the  ChnsUan  w<^d ;  *"""l7'»B  "^  »'™<^' 

propheUc  words  '{j}" /. ''"J„f^,t^«"'^^^  Tim." 
r:£r?5=tSKJ2:"lif  a^-t  ri«l.  of  the  see  of  P^ 
tor  s~  wi  Aree  huadred  years  too  late  to  ertabl.sh  «.y  clarm  to 
Z  htdsW?  of  the  church,  a'nd  especially  "y  »ch  -»^  '^^J^ 
rf  Coirt-finople.    Now,  my  fiiends,  whv  did  Constant  wantto 

JSTtot: ^r tn'^^^S^thorit^ n^^^^  l^^^^T-  ^^ 

Zmaey  was  stUl  at  Rome,  and  like  another  Queen  of  1?"X  »°°  »"»- 

griSt«»io».,  Const»^»  aspired  to  re«n  •»P'^^' "•.  ^^'^^ 
SaitoPoUtics.    Accordingtotheid^  of  Aat  t^mewju^^^^^^ 

vkatTCMtatira  relics  were  held,  she  could  set  up  "°  8'?°",'VC:  ^i^ 
SHplSS  independence  of  Con.t«.|a.gge,  urf^  she  h»l  the  he«l 
•r  8b  Paul  brouirht  from  Borne,  and  in  this  she  taiiea. 

SibTsays,  and  it  is  one  of  the  few  sterling  trnths  he  ew  aaul, 
(Ih™*  it^s  a  bull)  that  Rome  would  have  per&hed  amidst  so  r^nj 

P|oU  r,1.knol;'X':^«t  ^"'""eTr^fbyteT?^^ 
fMniiMls  m©  o»  what  mj  wormy  ainag"""'- »»*»'  ^r.Uo  rnUptm 

rZIiZ  nnniimr  a  French  iihysician,  during  the  session  of  the  College 
Sr-Si^n^^thatir^^    IWe'forevIr  if  we  could J.ve  M^ia^ou^ 

ifaj?i    Rome  lives,  andTa  ^^^-\^J^^^^'^l''':\^ 

iST  tlMMJfption  of  Tital  alinient,  or  by  the  "«i  f^^^'^J^'*'"'^* 

Xfc  sxJSis  all  peceaf  kuf^.iiiB  unimportoiit  ^o^^^^;      ^.^^ 

Now  I  cannot  see  the  applicability  of  '*» V^^fJ^^  Thev^^ 
hom  containing  the  answer  of  the  ^^pe  to  ConstanUa.    ^g^  J^^^^ 

Sar  story,  ind  I  belieye  P'«>«««?"^  ^'^^^^ '^/n™^^^^^ 

Christ,  i?H«f  SLT!i^lL  d^t?^^^^  Globes  of  fire,  as  his- 
turo  eonsigiied  by  Ood  to  endless  destrucuon.    '^^""^.   ,    . '        |^. 

liiflHUi  say,  issued  from  thfl  foundations,  and  so  ^^^"»^*^^;°^^^^^^ 
ZTas  to^^mpel  them  to desisL    1  think  it  like  y  ^^^^^^^j'*^^^ 
happened,  buClike  the  story  of  Om^l^  n  f^  "^j^^^f,^^^  ^ 

Now  we  comt  to  the  important  doctrine  of  "'^*"3^""r.  "  ^"^ 
doSriiis  of  the  mmm  CaoSlic  ^^l^'^j^^Mhat,  wh^^^^ 
was  In  inor,  when  mm  thing  was  adored  as  God,  8*^®^  J^f ,  "T„^ 
Wd  vice  kept  pace  witli  errol  the  Almighty,  piiying  ^^^f/;'^°«^ 
Mt  Ms  Son,  dhrist  Je««s,  the  Word  "^^^  ^^^^^^^^.^ji^^^ 
iMh  and  to  redeem  mankind.  Jesns  Christ  wy  ^jd,  eq^-^^m  to 
FiiMT  la  efoiy  diviiio  ptwrfectioii.  He  possessed  i™***  Jf^^^ 
ZS,"«d  iSLto  poP  to  nse^e  me«j.  J^^f^^jy^^^^^  JX. 
plishmont  of  tkj  grott Task  imp<^  on  him  by ^'^^"^'^Jf^^^^^^^ 

L  performed  miSicles.   «« -^T?/^']  "t"*  5!!t7ln  ^cS^  a^^^^^^^^ 
and  Mied,  "Laaarus  come  forth,"  and  the  dead  m*"  a^***®  ^"^.'^^f. 

hlewTi  hiseKticied  siste^i.  He  ?i»^\»»- t^^^^d  U.e  m^^^ 
whidi  was  borne  the  only  son  of  the  widow  of  Nairn,  and  "»e  J"**]!"^ 
«r%  teaia  were  dried  in  that  son's  living  embrace-     He  gave  heanng 


to  the  deaf,  lie  opened  the  eyes  of  the  Wind,  he  healed  the  pmhrtie. 
The  evidence  of  these  wonders  was  such  that  even  the  skeptical  Je# 
was  convinced,  and  all  the  people  exclaimed  that  man  had  never 

done  the  like.  i    *-•  j 

When  he  had  thus,  by  miraeks,  proved  himself  to  be  «od,  as  it  was 
no  part  of  his  divine  plan  to  remain  always  in  a  homan  form,  nor  to 
visit  any  other  nation,  than  Judea,  althongh  all  the  nations  of  the  earth 
throuffhont  all  ages  were  to  have  the  gospel  preached  unto  them,  he 
chose  twelve  men,  whom  he  dili^ntly  instnicled,  as  friends,  and  not 
as  servants,  in  all  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom.    These  he  sent,  as  his 
apostles,  10  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature.     But  before  he  sent 
them,  he  assured  them  that  he  would  abide  with  them  forever.     His 
words  were  these:  "All  power  is  given  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth. 
Going  therefore  teach  ye  all  nations ;  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  teaching  them  to 
ohserve  all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you ;  and  behold  I 
am  with  you  all  days  even  to  the  consummation  of  the  world."  Matt, 
ixviii.  9,  20.     And  that  they  might  be  infallible,  he  breathed  on 
them,  saying,  "  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  will  teach  yOn 
ALL  TRUTH,  and  bring  all  things  to  your  mind  whatsoever  I  have  said 
to  you."  John  xiv.  26.     "'Pie  Spirit  of  truth,  whom  the  world  cannot 
receive   because  it  seoth  him  not,  nor  knoweth  him;  hot  you  shall 
know  him,  because  he  shall  abide  with  yon  and  be  in  yon. '  St.  John 
xiv.  17.  This  is  the  reason  why  the  Catholic  church  believes  in  mfalh- 
bility :  If  every  man  enjoys  the  privilege  of  taking  the  bible  according 
to  his  own  understanding  thereof,  the  Catholic  should  not  be  molested 
in  the  exercise  of  a  common  right.     He  does  take  the  bible  for  his 
guide,  and  strong  as  any  in  Holy  Writ  is  the  proof  he  finds  therein, 
for  the  doctrine  of  an  infallible  authority  established  by  Chnst  in  his 
church.    The  Savior  tells  the  apostles,  that  he  will  be  with  them  ail 
day9-^nd  says,  "he  that  hkaretm  you  heareth  me  :  and  he  that 
despiseth  you,  despiseth  me :  and  he  that  despiselh  me,  despiseth  him 
that  sent  me,"  &c.      In  the  name  of  God,  why  did  Jesus  Chnst  say 
these  words,  and  inspire  his  disciples  to  record  them,  if  we  were 
not  to  believe  them  1     I  cannot  conceive  how  it  is  possible  that  we 
should  take  these,  his  most  emj^atic  declarations,  to  mean  any  thing, 
but  what  they  obviously  signify.    Why  did  St.  Paul  say  that  the 
church  was  the  '»  pillar  and  ground  of  truth,"  if  this  pillar  and  that 
foundation  were  to  give  way  as  soon  as  the  apostles  died,  that  is  to  say 
in  a  few  short  years  1     Why  did  the  apostle  command  all  to  obey  their 
prelates,  if  the  while  edifice  of  truth  would  give  way  as  soon  as  he 
had  disappeared  from  the  earth  1    No,  my  friends,  of  the  kingdom  of 
Jesus  Christ  there  shall  be  no  end,  until  all  nations  shall  be  gathered 
into  the  one  fold  under  one  shepherd  :  until  we  all  meet  m  the  unitt 
or  rAiTH :  and  not  as  bishop  Home  says,  jumbling  together  an  undi- 
gested heap  of  contrarieties  and  jarring  sects  into  the  same  mass,  slid 
making  the  old  chaos  the  plan  of  the  new  reformation. 

I  might  dissert  for  hours  on  this  subject,  but  I  am  compelled  to 
leave  off  here;  yet  I  beg  my  Protestant,  I  sincerely  and  from  my 
heart  say,  most  respected  fellow-citizens  to  reflect  on  these  matters, 
that  they  may  not  believe  the  misrepresentations  of  our  doctrines,  vehich 
Ihey  have  too  oflen  heard,  as  if  we  had  no  good,  scriptural  grounds  for 
our  faith.    Such  misrepresentation  has  done  us  much  injury.    It  haa 


"I'iMt 
IIP* 


OH   TB* 


1 


Hm,  it  hiJ;  io  many  iMtooces,  ;"»1"'^\7»,*"  "'^TSU^Stte^^ 
iillin  of  Protestants  an  mpmor,  I  oould  almoBt  "T '^■^""fl^; 
|!SS,J  of  iw-lhey  abhor  iu    Some  of^tNm^re  ^oajSJ^j^^l 

•TT'«.5?!^dl'dtr:^»ces.io«.,  h.toohMb«»-l»nfcj™. 
My  mena  saia  t "»"  "'     j««triii*i  ftince  the  oommencement  of  this 

!?'"'^>"T,„"'i;7eferknJnXl    He  tm  allow  me  to  «iy.th.l 
diaim^oo,  thw»  he  ever  kiww  t«ore^^^^^^  ^  j  ^^  ^.^^ 

I—«Wilinj  •«»»«*'»8.™,'^wwt  itt  iWn  Bortnit,  and  not  a  carU* 

Slnr.SlC'Xl^n^ei^    H'^^-""  S""«'Tr'^ 
tan,  and  iiiii  leai  *"***"■,"»  «;«.iU  to  God  thev  would  eTeo  believe 

11  mm  sing te  arucie  m  wia*  vi«««     _,w^,  «*«u1a  in  thu  same  creed,  tn 
chmd.."  *Bat  they  do  njt :  or  r'^l'^^  Chri^^ 
«»,,.».««  of  the  worfs;'lhd.eTe^^^  «■»  ^  «« 

Sbppo»«  1  tell  a  man  that  l  o*"""."'™'.  ..J  .;.„„,,„ -.u.th* 
&«!ln^te  of  hU  repeated  assereraUons,  that  he  did  not  say  whatue 
fSStaSd?  Do  IbeWe  himi  Suppow  1  »y  Hoje  h'™' «»f  J« 
5?!ll  I ».  to  hia  inlufT,  are  my  protestatioiis  what  they  ought  to  be  T 
t:  U  il  rth'^J^^.tS'.U  u/oS  belie.,  in  "^7^  "•^f^^ji^.^if^ 
Srfhear  htsehnrch  which  he  ~™«™>»  7~ J?^'  *iak«P hU 
«.  1  beliere  in  Jews  Christ,  nnlesa  wo  follow  hm  »>•».  '^  ^P  ^» 
S»a«lme«t..    If  we  do  not  w.  w.  are  hyp~n<«.  ^l^^^^^Z 

MMikivAlT  that  we  despiie  hiinseit.    »*  ii  any  inniH     "*"  j".' .a; 

SS^l^r'o.rchaTrhVhim  be  to  the.  as  the  heathen  and  the  pubU- 

""lillt^I:  «'toM  Itat  the  meuOng  of  «««<*»«*"»  1';"''t«tJ"l 

pStir^A.  ftithW  «r"^,*^:±r1Sji^^  be^l^'er T  .J 
teamrae  the  whole  earth  and  appeal  to  every  mdmduai  oeiiever  lot  »n 
nation  of  the  tow,  or  a  defence  of  my  mnocencel     This  is 

SSSrS^*^  Whereas  ChHsfs  im-^^^r^f'^^ii'^ 
eSe  if  a  tTunal,  which  he  commands  me  to  h«r,  "•  *°7*^ 
toii  which  be  eoauMnd.  me  to  >»?"' ?"^«' ^tiPfA^nouii 
S»Jed  a  heathen  and  a  pnhlican.    If  this  'J?''°°»»  "°»"  ^"""T 

Xly,  wonld  OWjt  k«~  «»»7«"*f  »* '^'^  JL^Sl  ^wer  wS 
as  I  iould  hear  and  obey  himself  1    I  hope  the  desired  answer  w«i 

-jfe  my^srrsr.-  -j.  ,^rr„'^«-^^jni.r,d"'S: 

n.*  •■■»Lma  n  ^■atUtwan  nf  the  Uiutanaii  denonunation  snoum  way, 

t..«*8«*m  omdit  it  t  A  Unitarian  heUeves  in  Jesus  i^nnsi,  nui  now  ««©• 
Wie;:^^^^^^^  whl  He  denies  h^di^^^  t  rSurctiri  t 
mm  of  the  Proteatwit  system.  T^ej  all  wy,  1  J^»l«/^J^^^  ^^^ 
mm  the  bihle ;  when  Oiey  make  Christ  and  the  ^^'"f!^^ 
Dontrary  doctrines ;  and  all  think  they  are  going  to  ^^J^P;-^l^^}^{^ 
ZTlSieve  the  same  SaTior.  Alasl  how  many  «oul8  has  notthia 
rZ  Inred  from  the  only  path  that  conducts  to  ete^^^^^^  Me !  J^The^ 
b  a  way  which  temdk  to  a  man  to  be  ri^ht,  Jjayslhe  hol^^enp  "re^ 
"but  the  end  thereof  leads  down  to  hell?'  The  ^^^^J^^^"^^ 
MB  diametiicilly  opposed  to  each  other.    They  are  at  greater  aiiu 


BOMAN   CATHOLIC    E«LI6I0N.  167 

Aodw  Hitn  the  two  Indies.  Two  men  of  diffeieiit  sects  will  meet: 
m9  one,  "  Do  yon  believe  in  Christ  1"  **  If  es."  **  But  you  do  not  be- 
lieve in  him  as  God  t"  **No."  "No  matter,  we  are  both  good  believers." 
Airain,  two  others — **■  Do  youbelieye  in  Christ  1"  **  Yesl"  "But you  do 
n<H  believe  in  a  hell  I"  "  No."  "  No  matter,  we  aie  both  sound  ortho- 
dox chrisUans."  Or  again,  "Do  yon  believe  in  Christ!"  "Yes,"  "But 
you  don't  believe  in  baptism" — and  so  if  goes. 

Now  Jesus  Christ  cannot  contradict  himself:  he  cannot  say  things 
incompatible  with  each  other,  as  that  two  and  two  make  four ;  and 
two  and  two  make  five.  My  friends,  I  come  here  not  to  attack  other 
sects.  I  come  only  to  defend  the  truth.  Of  all  religions,  all  teach- 
ing, as  they  do,  contrary  doctrines,  one  only  can  be  right.  If  one 
only  can  be  true,  all  others  must  be  untrue.  Have  you  ascertained 
which  is  that  true  one  1  And  if  so,  how  have  you  ascertained  it!  To 
whatever  denomination  you  may  belong,  your  Protestant  neighbor,  as 
enlightened,  as  conscientious  and  as  pious  in  his  own  opinion  as  you 
are,  thinks  you  have  embraced  dangerous  error,  and  Jesus  Christ 
sounds  in  your  ears  the  dreadful  words,  "  He  that  believeth  not"— 
not  what  he  thinks  is  right,  but  what  is  rightp— "  shall  be  dumnedJ'^ 
Mark  xvi.  16. — [Time  expired.} 

#bur  6*clockf  P.  Mi 
Ma.  Campbell  rises— 

I  hope  we  shall  better  understand  each  other.  The  question  be- 
tween Protestants  and  Roman  Catholics,  on  the  subject  of  infallibility 
as  respects  the  faith,  is  usually  propounded  in  the  following  form: 
•  /*  there  an  infallible  rule  rf  faith  T  Both  parties,  answer  in  the  af- 
firmative. Then,  •  Where  shall  it  be  found  r  Each  party  then  sets  about 
defining  and  wrestling  about  this  said  infallible  rule.  The  Protestant 
says,  the  bible  alone  is  his  infallible  rule ;  and  the  Romanist  says  the 
church,  or  the  bible  explained  by  the  church,  is  his  infallible  rule ! 
Thus  the  Protestant  rests  upon  the  bible  and  the  Romanist  upon  the 
church— neither  of  which  make  men  infallible.  We  apprehend  there 
is  a  sophism  some  where  in  the  phraseology :  for  both  parties  have 
exhausted  folios  on  this  subject  and  seem  often  to  have  retired  from 
the  arena  equally  perplexed.  My  antagonist  seems  to  be  much  in 
advance  of  me,  and  sometimes  so  far  in  my  rear  as  to  be  out  of  sight. 
Meanwhile,  he  will  please  not  to  forget  that  it  is  my  province,  at  least, 
to  sketch  out  my  own  method  of  discussion,  and  lead  the  way.  My 
last  speech  is  certainly  yet  unanswered. 

I  do  not  choose  the  phraseology  which  has  been  popular  in  some 
discussions,  on  the  subject  of  the  rule  of  faith.  There  is  too  inuch 
ambiguity,  too  much  room  for  logomachy  in  some  of  these  definitions. 
There  is,  in  strict  propriety,  no  infallible  rule  of  faith.  Nor  is  it  pos- 
sible there  can  be:  for  men  and  angels  have  erred  under  all  rules.  I 
wish  to  be  understood.  The  terms  fallible  and  infallible  do  not  at  all 
apply  to  things  ?  they  only  apply  to  persons.  We  may  have  a  per- 
fect and  complete— or  a  sufilcient  rule :  but  we  cannot  have  an  infal- 
lible one.  The  fallibility,  or  the  infallibility  is  in  the  application  of 
the  rule— not  in  the  rule  itself.  The  mechanician  may  have  a  perfect 
rule ;  and  yet  err  in  measuring  any  superficies.  It  is  not  possible  in 
mechanics,  nor  in  morals,  nor  in  religion,  to  have  a  rule  which  will 
nrevent  error  •  so  long  as  those  who  use  it  are  free  and  fallible  agents. 
As  Paul  said  on  an  occasion,  not  exactly  similar,  we  may  here  say  ; 


M 


WKBkTM  ON  THE 

iien  could  hiTO  hmn  a  law  glvwi  to  freo  tfeiits,  wWk  wmM 
litve  proeliidod  error,  ▼«fily  God  woold  have  pv««  it.  But  as  he 
las  not  mrm  any  such  law,  tlieraforo,  there  has  been  error  in  heaven 
as  on  earth.  Angels  feU  and  Adam  apostatiaed.  I  own,  it  may  be 
iaid,  tbat  in  common  pmkmt*^  wo  igaiatiTely  talk  of  an  uitallible 
mle^  1  admit  that  we  do,  and  that  is  the  reaaoa,  when  we  come  to 
debate  Hie  matter,  the  parties  are  confounded :  for  the  bible  aloiw,  or 
the  bible  on  the  table;  and  the  chnich  alone.  Of  the  church  and  the 
bible  together,  have  made  no  one  free  from  error.  Therefore,  there 
is  no  iifaiHbk  rule  in  truth :  but  we  have  a  perfect  rule,  and  if  we 
apply  it  perfectly,  it  will  make  us  perfect.  So  far,  then,  as  infallibi- 
lity IS  concerned,  if  there  be  truth  in  these  remarks,  both  parties  are 
again  equal.  Oua  auLi  is  the  iibli  alohb.  The  Roman  Catholic 
lule  contains  mm  hunorid  ahd  thirty  rivi  laroi  polio  volumes 
OTPcaAiiPBD  TO  THE  BiaLB,  omI  l*e  AWKjaYFHAl  Those  are  composed 
of  the  following  parts  and  parcels:  Ist  Apoetolloal  Fathers  36  folios, 
tnd  Bight  volumes  of  Decretals,  3rd  Ten  volumes  of  Bulls  of  the 
Popeil  4th  Thirty  one  volumes  of  Canons  and  Decrees  of  Councils; 
fitfc  Pifly  one  folios  of  the  Jclii  Amclomm— Acts  of  the  Saints,  amount* 
ing  in  all  to,— one  hundred  and  thirty  ive  volumes  folio.  Our  rules, 
then,  differ  exceedingly  in  point  of  length,  breadth  and  thickness.  The 
Buiiian  Catholic  role  is  exceedingly  unwieldy.  It  requires  a  whole 
QMiMii  to  move  it,  and  apply  it  to  a  single  opinion.  Ours  is,  at  Iwt, 
portable— But  still  the  phrase  rule  if  faith  is  not  Protestant.  Hie 
bible  is  the  faith ;  and  that  testimony  is  the  rale  and  measure  of  our 
belief:  for  in  logical  troth  testimony  is  the  only  proper  rule  of  faith. 
However,  the  question  is  not  strictly,  what  tf  the  role  of  faith! 

We  both  agree  that  the  true  reason  of  infallibiliiy  is  inspiration.  1 
was  glad  to  hear  this  noble  concession  from  my  learned  opponent. 
lesus  Christ  was  able  to  give  a  perfect  role.  He  therefore  inspired 
twelve  apostles  to  form  that  rale,  and  enjoined  us  to  hear  them.  So 
far,  there  is  no  difference  between  us.  We  both  have  a  perfect  rale, 
and  Aat  perfect  role  is  the  bible ;  and  the  reason  of  its  perfection  is 
ita  immrattQfu  But  where  is  the  inspiration  of  the  one  hundred  and 
tkiri^jM  folios?  Does  it  require  this  immense  library  to  make  us 
undeiataiid  the  bible  1  However,  if  ray  friend  can  establish  their  in- 
spiration, and  show  that  Jesus  Christ  has  spoken  in  these  volumes ; 
we  wUl  adopt  them  without  controversy.  But  there  is  a  want  of  uni- 
formity in  the  Catholic  faith  (even  with  the  help  of  these  volumes :) 
and  hence  the  four  sects  mentioned  just  before  I  sat  down,  on  the 
question,  where  shall  this  infallibility  be  found:  for  after  all  the  one 
hudied  and  thirty  five  volumes  lying  on  the  table,  are  no  better  than 
the  bibk  lying  on  the  table,  the  Roman  Catholics  being  judges — ^They 
must  have  an  infallible  interpreter  of  these  volumes.  Where  shall  he  bo 
irand !  "  Some  say  that  infallibility  resides  in  the  head  of  the  church : 
tnd.  Others,  that  it  resides  in  a  general  council,  in  which  the  church 
la  represented :  although  such  a  general  council  never  sat.  3rd,  Others 
argue,  that  it  lies  neither  in  the  pope,  nor  in  the  council  separately  : 
but  in  the  two  combined— a  4th  party  says  that  it  lies  neither  in  the 
pope,  nor  in  the  council,  nor  in  both:  but  in  the  whole  church,  re- 
sponding to  any  question.  Now  might  we  not  call  these  four  parties  f 
Do  our  controversies  about  atonement,  or  election  &c.  make  us  more 
tfuly  jcc/j,  tlian  do  these  different  interpretations  make  parties  in  the 
dimch  1   But  where  shall  infalUbility  bo  found  !  If  this  caa- 


SOXAH  CATHOLIC    BKLI6I0X. 


169 


■ot  be  shown,  it  is  of  no  more  use  to  us  in  time  of  need,  than  a 
mountain  of  gold  in  the  bottom  of  the  ocean ;  or  a  field  of  diamonds  in 
the  moon.  I  hope  the  gentleman  will  clearly  ascertain  this  p<Hnt,  and 
make  us  all  understand  where  we  shall  find  this  infallibility.  We 
would  like  to  know,  how  the  combination  of  a  given  number  oi  falli- 
bles  will  make  one  infallible  being ;  or,  by  what  laws  of  neutraliza- 
tion  the  lyiibility  of  every  member  of  the  church  is  destroyed,  and 
the  whole  mass  becomes  infallible.  But  if  the  infallibility  of  a  dogma 
depends  on  inspiration,  what  is  the  use  of  councils,  unless  the  pro- 
■lise  of  infallibility  be  made  exclusively  to  councils  1 

But  I  have  no  necessity  for  the  argument  which  I  had  framed  on 
this  point.  The  bishop  attributes  infallibility  to  inspiration— not  to 
combination :  So  do  Protestants,  Therefore  on  this  cardinal  point  we 
seem  more  likely  to  agree,  than  I  expected.  Protestants  have  then 
tn  inspired  creed,  and  this  gives  to  them  all  the  infallibility,  which 
Roman  Catholics  claim  to  themselves :  but  should  any  one  say  that 
the  majority  of  a  council  constitutes  infallibitity,  then  we  should  have 
to  enquire  into  the  reasons  of  the  infallibility  of  said  majority ;  and 
for  the  sake  of  some  of  that  class,  I  would  here  state  that  these  roa- 
iorilies  oflen  are  very  lean  minorities  of  the  church.  The  council  of 
Trent  debated  eighteen  years,  during  which  time  she  held  twenty  five 
sessions.  In  one  session  there  were  but  forty  eight  bishops,  and  they 
not  the  most  learned.  A  majority  of  these  determined  that  the  apo- 
crypha was  inspired,  and  that  it  with  the  Vulgate  Old  and  New  Tes- 
tament ;  was  of  paramount  authority  in  the  church.  Twenty  five 
oishops,  a  majority  of  forty  eight,  represent  the  whole  christian  com- 
munity !  The  question  now  is,  were  these  men  inspired  while  they 
Were  voting  this  dogma?  I  wish  the  bishop  to  state  his  views  on  this 
point  clearly,  if  indeed  he  thinks  that  inspiration  is  at  all  an  attribute 
3r  a  gift  promised  to  majorities  however  lean. 

But,  my  friends,  when  you  have  got  this  ponderous  creed  from  the 
decisions  of  general  councils,  must  it  not  be  interpreted  1  Must  not 
the  dogma  of  a  majority  be  also  interpreted!  And  who  is  to  interpret 
them  I  Every  man  for  himself  I  Then  are  you  Protestants ;  or,  Ro- 
manists workinpr  by  the  Protestant  roles.  After  all,  I  see  nothing 
E lined  by  all  this  expensive  and  ponderous  machinery.  Is  not  every 
oman  Catholic  obliged  to  judge  for  himself  on  the  meaning  of  every 
dogma,  and  whether  he  ought  to  receive  or  reject  it?  Then,  I  ask, 
are  not  the  inspired  verses  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  as  easily 
interpreted,  as  the  inspired  decrees  of  these  councils  ?  Did  not  the  Spirit 
that  inspired  the  apostles,  teach  as  clearly,  as  the  fathers  in  their  couo- 
ails  1     I  wish  to  understand  the  bishop  more  accurately  on  these  points. 

The  gentleman  (I  regret  to  state  it)  spoke  of  Protestants  as  hating 
Iha  Roman  Catholics,  from  a  supposed  ifirnorance  of  their  creed.  For 
myself,  and  for  Protestants  generally,  I  disavow  the  idea,  and  the 
Ungua^e  of  hatred  towaida  Romanists,  as  such.  We  feel  the  sane 
humanity  and  benevolence  towards  Roman  Catholics,  as  men,  aa^to 
Protestants.  We  alwajrs  discriminate  between  tenets  and  men,  a 
ay  stem  or  theory,  and  those  who  hold  it.  With  open  arms,  I  would 
welcome  to  our  shores  the  oppressed  of  all  nations,  Romanists  and 
Protestants.  I  would  extend  to  the  Roman  Catholic  every  facility  to 
improve  his  condition  by  immiopration  into  this  fiivored  land,  provide*^ 
only  I  were  free  from  all  suspicion,  that  his  faith  in  the  pope  and 
P  32 


no 


PSVATR   ON    THK 


■mlifmslnifrh,  wowW  net  iidnee  him  or  hit  children  to  wfwt  from  in« 
Off  BiiM,  that  freedom  »nd  liberty  wkkh  1  would  glidlir  partiripiw 
villi  him.  I  oppose  liis  religioii ;  beciiws*,  I  tincerely  think  ii  ensiavet 
liiiii,  and  would  epslaire  mf»,  if  it  had  the  power.  Bui,  in  all  this  th«>re 
it  no  koired  to  Roman  Catholics  as  men.  Wo  are  devoted  to  American 
iMitntiont,  because  they  are  humane.  For  the  ealie  of  Romanists,  n« 
Hrflil  an  ProiMtants,  we  d%j»ire  to  see  them  permanent.  We  fear  the 
eiclusive,  praneriplive,  and  despotic  tf ttmi  of  Romanism ;  hut  we 
feel  nothing  but  benevolence  to  Roman  Catholics. 

My  worthy  opponent  has  done  us  great  honor  in  saying,  that  be 
Inmrt JMUf  eieellent  ProiettMits,  whom  he  esteems  highly  as  good 
1U».  Of  eeniie,  then,  iliey  Biav  be  sewed  oat  of  the  Roman  Catholio 
cbireli.  If  so,  what  is  thediierence  between  bis  infallible  and  our 
fiilUble  Imith  1  I  eannet  find  time  to  reply  to  any  remarks  of  my  oppo* 
nent,  mot  made  in  reference  to  my  arguments. — [Minus  5  minutes.] 

Maff-foti  4  &*thekf  P.  J£ 

Bisoor  PumcEix  mm-- 

I  shall  reply  to  what  has  been  said,  and  then  pnrsne  mj  own  line 
of  argtment.  The  Catholic  church  claims  to  have  an  infallible  rule 
rf  faith  and  an  infallible  code  of  morals.  The  former  would  be  of 
little  use  without  the  latter.  So  intimate  is  the  connection  between 
found  faith  and  sound  morals,  that  we  hold  that  if  the  Catholic  code 
of  morals  is  vicious,  she  is  not  infallible  in  doctrine.  If  the  working 
of  her  code  of  morals  is  proved  to  lead,  or  to  have  led,  into  vice,  she 
is  mot  inMliWe.  This  never  has  been  proved,  nor  ever  can  it  be. 
But  lie  contrary  to  this  has  been  proved,  and  its  proof  is  cumulative. 
The  darkest  zma  furnish  some  of  its  brightest  illustrations.  She 
does  not  pretend  to  be  infallible  in  discipline,  in  the  sense  of  its  im- 
Biitability.  The  gentleman  confounds  discipline  with  morals,  anil 
Ihit  want  of  clearness  of  ideas  is  the  source  of  the  entire  difficulty. 
Biaeipline,  I  think,  I  have  explained.  It  regulates  the  dress  of  the 
cleiwy,  the  litnrgical  language,  the  time  of  flinginff  hallelujah,  the 
wmim  of  shaving  the  head,  or  making  the  tonsure,  the  giving  of  the 
eiip  to  the  laity,  the  use  of  leavened,  or  unleavened  bread  for  the  sa« 
eranent,  selecuon  of  davs  for  leasts  and  fasts,  &c.  &c.  The  church 
laialliaTe  the  power  of^changing  in  these  respects— in  other  words 
ef  aiaping  her  discipline  to  times,  and  oenntnes.  And  all  this,  so 
far  from  being  an  iaperleotion  is  a  proof  of  her  nerfeciion,  of  her 
laving  been  established  by  Jesus  Christ  to  teach,  and  guide,  and  sanc- 
tify iifi  nations  fm  ever,  I  did  not  state  the  crude  proposition,  which 
the  genlienwn  has  attributed  to  me,  via.  that  the  pope  is  as  fallible  as 
I  am.  I  would  not  compare  myself  thus  to  him.  I  occupy  an  humble 
elation  compared  lo  his,  and  1  an  eonseious  of  the  want  of  those  em* 
iiently  distinfuished  qualltiee  of  head  and  heart  which  compose  his 
ilMineler.  He  has  grace  and  lights  which  I  have  not.  The  gentle* 
*  tells  Protestants  a  flattering  tale,  that  they  have  is  infallible  a 
^  as  Catholics.  This  is  keeping  the  word  of  promise  to  the  ear 
«...  breaking  it  to  the  heart.  Does  he  not  in  the  same  speech,  ao- 
ksfVirledge  that  their  fallible  opinions,  doctrines,  traditions  make  their 
Mn  mle,  the  bible,  vain  and  nothing  worth  !  The  bible  is  a  dead  let- 
ter—all  pretend  to  find  their  conflicting  tenets  in  it.  Where  is  then» 
the  iniafible  rulo »    Doen  he  not  charge  Protestants  as  well  as  Cath- 


SOMAN    CATHOLIC    ESLIOIOTT. 

•lice  witk  error.  Ajid  why  I  The  gentleman  said,  where  is  the  use 
of  the  headv  without  the  body  I  I  ask  where  ie  the  use  of  m  bodf 
without  a  head  I  And  he  said,  if  the  body  regulates  the  head  it  is 
anomalous.  But  what  is  it  that  sends  vitality  to  the  hesd  I  Is  It  not 
the  heart  with  its  healthful  pulses  and  its  quickening  cunent  1  The 
pope  is  the  head — the  council  is  the  heart — and  I  have  no  objection 
to  his  calling  the  laity  the  members,  to  continue  the  fiorure.  While 
there  is  no  schism  in  the  members,  no  separation  of  the  head  or  of  the 
heart,  all  is  soundness  and  life*— so  in  the  church — pope,  pastors,  and 
laity.  United  ufe  stand,  divided  you  fall.  The  true  theory  of  the 
church,  like  that  of  the  human  body,  is  union.  Ask  not,  does  the 
heart,  alone,  or  the  head  alone,  or  the  members  alone  contain  the  vital 
principle— thev  sympathize ;  they  live  and  move  and  have  their  being 
together,  God  seems  to  address  himself  to  the  head  and  to  the  heart 
in  the  revealed  definitions  of  his  essence.  **  I  am  who  am,*'  and  *^GoD 
IS  Lovs,"  one  of  these  definitions  is  for  the  reason,  the  other  for  the 
affections ;  one  for  the  Old  Testament,  tlie  other  for  the  New.  Both, 
however,  come  from  the  same  source  and  tend  to  define  Him — Lifc, 
Wisdom  and  Love. 

The  division  of  truth  into  objective  and  subjective  is  correct— but 
objective  revealed  truth  is  the  whole  truth  revealed  by  God,  wherever 
found  and  in  whatever  manner  conveyed.  What  is  the  use  of  this, 
without  subjective  truth,  or  our  own  knowledge  and  conviction  that 
we  possess  objective  truth,  and  that  we  are  eure  of  possessing  it  1  Of 
this,  the  Protestant,  who  rejects  authority  in  religion,  and  pretends  to 
find  out  religion  for  himself,  from  a  book,  which  he  acknowledges,  fal- 
lible men  handed  to  him,  can  never  be  sure.  The  fact,  the  testimony, 
the  belief  of  the  testimony,  the  feeling  consentaneous  with  the  belief^ 
and  the  correspondent  action,  are  all  human  faith  and  natural  feeling, 
Struggling,  and  striving  for  some  higher  and  belter  gift*,  which  it  cdn- 
not  attain  without  infallible  assurance,  without  the  Catholic  rule.  What 
is  the  testimony  that  might  be  deceived  itself  and  might  deceive  me  t 

He  says  we  Catholics  have  a  very  broad  rule— 135  folios.  No  such 
thing.     We  have  a  quite  convenient  pocket>rule.    It  is  the  pearl  of 

Ct  value— a  diamond,  with  which  we  cut  the  brittle  glass  of  mere 
an  creeds  in  pieces,  and  with  which  we  solve  every  difficulty. 
It  is  this :  "  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Catholic  church."  They  were  the 
apostles-^he  was  Christ  who  gave  it  to  us.  It  does  not  suppose  if- 
norance,  or  servile  acquiescence.  It  lifts  us  above  error,  giving  us  i 
divine  warrant  for  every  tenet  of  our  faith,  and  directing  our  undeiv 
standings  and  hearts  to  Goo,  who  speaks  to  us  by  his  church.  I 
hope  I  did  not  understand  my  friend  correctly  this  morning,  but  if  I 
have  he  has  uttered  horrid  blasphemy.  I  understood  him  to  say  that 
God  could  not  have  given  a  perfect  rule  (to  make  man  infallible,  and 
prevent  him  from  error.^ 

Mb.  Campbell  explained.  He  had  said  that  God  could  not  create 
m  hill  without  a  valley — could  not  make  man  a  free  agent  and  bind  him. 

Bishop  Purcell.  Could  not  God  have  created  the  angels  so  that 
they  could  not  fall  into  sin  1 

Mb.  Campbell.  There  can  be  no  virtue  nor  vice,  without  liberty 
of  choice  :   neither  in  man  nor  in  angel. 

Bishop  PurcelL.  My  friend  has  said  that  God  could  not  have  cre- 
ated angels  or  men  virtuous  without  making  them  free  to  sin.  The 
angels  of  heaven  are  not  free  to  do  wrong,  are  they  not  virtuous ! 


m^ 


lit 


1MB  ATM  Off  1*HB 


Mm,  CAMfBiLt..    If  siHsii  ii  iIm  iMtnre  of  uiflvlSf  thjfty  sre  ▼irtnoiiB 

%f  mum.    ¥m§Bm,  lilierty  eooiittf  in  ^aitiiif  m  waimm  with  our  ns- 


BOMAH  CATHOLIC   BBUOION. 


178 


BisBOP  PimciM..  Then  the  •iiflelt  are  Tinuoos  withont  being  free. 
If  the  febel  antels  were  Tirtiioiit  oy  mature^  how  did  they  happen  to 
ftll  I  And  could  not  God  hare  made  the  angrels  who  are  now  good, 
liy  nature,  or  by  grace,  such  from  creation  1  I  will  now  continue  mj 
■ffmment.  It  doea  not  exceed  the  power  of  God  to  make  man  infat 
lible.  Christ  was  infallible ;  for  lie  was  God.  Now  if  he  could 
make  twelve  men  infallible,  as  Mr.  C.  admits  the  apostles  were,  why 
mmM  he  not  Mrpetuate  the  same  power  in  favor  of  his  entire  church, 
■inee  nioh  inrailible  authority  to  teaeh  his  true  doctrine  it  at  neceami* 
ly  now,  ■■  it  was  at  any  former  time  1 

Now  1  have  another  strong  argument  here— it  ia  old  with  ua,  bol 
MigmlMl  anew  by  reading  one  of  the  Protestant  papers,  from  New 
York.  It  is  the  Palladium,  and  my  friend  seems  to  know  the  editor, 
for  he  himself  has  given  occasion  for  the  very  article  in  question.  The 
argument  is  this :  If  tradition  be  fallible,  and  it  was  not  known  foi 
3M  years,  what  books  of  the  bible  were  genuine,  and  what  8pu« 
rioue,  how  shall  we  ascertain  that  we  have  the  bible !  How  shall  wa 
«ver  know  that  the  book  ia  the  book  of  God  ?  The  making  of  the  ca» 
BCM  or  list  of  becks  composing  the  inspired  volume,  was  a  difficulty 
yieldiii|  to  hut  few  otlwra  in  magnitude,  during  the  firat  four  hundred 
jMira  of  Christianity,  when,  if  we  must  believe  my  friend,  infallibility 
M  ieparted,  with  the  last  of  the  apostles,  to  heaven.  How  then  can 
ire  be  sure  that  our  present  canon  is  correct  I  Catholics  can  be  sura 
on  this  vital  point,  for  they  have  the  voucher  of  an  infallible  guardian 
of  the  holy  deposit,  for  its  correctness;  but  Protestants,  who  have  no 
■ueh  tribunal  to  enlighten  them,  how  can  they  be  sure  1  Catholics 
'luld  Ihntlnfkllibllitv  was  promised  to  the  cfihrch  by  Jesus  Christ.  Its 
tiiiniiifeiir  is  heard  in  a  general  council,  or  in  the  pope's  decision  in 
which  all  assent.  The  church  can  subsist  without  a  general  council. 
General  councils  are  not  essential — thojgh  frequently  of  use,  because, 
thonf  h  we  all  believe  witkoui  exeepHoth  that  the  pope's  decision,  in 
wbich,  after  it  has  been  dul^  made  known,  all  the  bishops  of  the  Ca- 
tholic world  aecfuiesee,  is  infallible,  still  the  decision  of  a  general 
■teieil  declares  in  a  more  in^iressive  and  solemn,  though  not  more  ao- 
liientic,  manner,  the  belief  of  tlie  Catholic  world  on  the  contested  doc- 
trine, and  thus  more  eflbetnally  proscribes  the  contrary  error,  llie 
«0liib»tiid  Protestant,  Leibnitz,  remarked  that  there  could  be  no  cerw 
tiira^  of  a  correct  decision  on  religious  matters,  equal  to  that  afforded 
by  tne  decision  of  a  ^neral  council.  The  four  sects  Mr.  C.  speaks 
of  all  aeree  in  the  belief  of  the  infallibility  of  the  church  representa- 
tive ani  of  the  church  responsive ;  if  1  must  employ  these  technical 
I«rm8--and  as  he  asks  **  could  not  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  inspired  the 
•postles,  teach  as  cleariy  as  the  Fathers  in  their  councils  1"  I  answer, 
•  Yss,*  and  he  has  so  taught  us  to  **HKAn  the  chdbch,"  for,  mproj^ 
tjfg'mrijpiim  u  rf  anyprimU  interprdaUmu 

Let  me  now  vindicate  the  humblest  Eoman  Catholic  of  my  flock,  or 
of  the  worid,  from  the  charge  of  pinning  hia  faith  to  the  sleeve  of  any 
man,  or  of  surrendering  his  conscience  to  the  keeping  of  hia  priest. 
Catholics  do  not  believe  because  the  priest  tells  them  to  believe,  butbe- 
mmm  they . consider  him  to  bo  the  fkiiliful  interpreter  of  Christ  and  thn 


organ  of  the  church,  but  should  be  dissent  from  the  onelos  of  God  and 

his  ecclesiastical  superiors,  that  moment  they  would  quit  him.  They 
see  his  teaching  accords  with  that  which  they  have  heard  from  otbera, 
which  they  have  read,  as  the  Catholic  doctrine.  If  they  doubt,  they 
ask  other  priests,  or  the  bishop.  Thus  while  they  know  the  priest  to 
be  orthodox,  they  hear  him,  or  rather  the  church,  they  hear  God  and 
they  believe  God.  And  in  this  there  is  no  servility.  The  faith  hn 
teaches  and  the  moral  law  he  expounds,  have  both  come  from  God,  and 
to  God  they  owe  and  pay  their  vows.  My  friend  misapprehends  msb 
I  did  not  say  that  Protestants  hated  Catholics.  I  say  that  some  Pro- 
tcRtants  are  often  prejudiced  against  them,  and  I  wondered  they  are  not 
more  so.  If  he  could  prove  the  odious  proposition  so  long  before  yon, 
the  Catholic  church  would  be  a  monster.  1  am  sorry  my  friend  has 
misunderstood  the  doctrines  of  the  Catholics,  and  I  am  glad  of  the  op- 
portunity which  is  thus  afforded  me,  of  coming  before  the  public  and 
showing  what  are  our  real  sentiments. 

I  come  to  the  doctrine  of  infallibility  again.  I  will  begin  my  argn* 
roent  this  evening,  and  conclude  perhaps  to-morrow  morning.  1  beg 
leave  to  read  what  I  have  myself  written  on  this  subject : 

VVhoever  reflects  upon  the  countless  varieties  of  human  character, 
the  ignorance  of  some  men,  the  prejudices  of  others,  the  passions  of 
all,  will  scarcely  require  that  we  should  expend  much  time  or  labor  to 
prove,  that  as  long  as  men  are  commanded  to  form  their  religion 
for  themselves,  even  though  the  book  they  receive  for  their  guide 
should  be  the  plainest  in  its  language  that  divine  wisdom  could  bestow, 
the  sources  of  error  will  be  never  drained.  No  matter  how  pure  thn 
doctrine  of  that  book,  how  holy  its  precepts,  how  luminous  its  evi* 
dences,  occasions  will  occur,  when  these  doctrines  will  be  contested, 
these  precepts  denied,  these  beaming  evidences  obscure  to  the  pride, 
the  voluptuousness,  and  the  love  of  independence,  inherent  in  a  per- 
verted nature.  Man,  under  the  influence  of  such  feelings,  will  read, 
will  write;  he  will  communicate  his  doubts  and  impart  his  prejudices 
to  others ;  he  will  originate  new  creeds,  and  form  new  sects ;  he  will 
raise  altar  against  altar,  and  desk  against  desk;  nor  will  any  one, 
consistently  with  Protestant  principles,  have  a  right  to  ask  him  why 
he  does  so.  At  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  when  the  right 
of  forming  religion,  every  man  for  himself,  and  the  bible  for  us  all, 
was  first  promulgated,  the  fierce  self-constituted  apostle  sounded  a 
deafening  peal  of  defiance,  and  denounced  all  authority  in  religious 
concerns  as  spiritual  tyranny.  "  Read  the  scriptures !"  he  vociferated 
to  the  astonished  crowd  of  wise  or  foolish,  learned  or  unlearned,  that 
thronged  to  hear  him.  ^^  Read  the  scriptures,  and  judge  for  yourselves : 
your  reason  and  the  spirit  will  enable  you  to  understand  them,  as  eas- 
ily as  you  can  discern  hot  from  cold,  or  sweet  from  bitter.  Read  the 
scriptures  :  they  that  run  may  read.  Judge  for  yourselves  !**  They 
did  read,  they  did  judge  for  themselves;  and  they  decided  against 
their  apostles,  and  against  one  another ! 

"When  hell,"  saya  an  illustrious  writer,  ** prepares  some  terrible 
calamity  for  mankind,  it  flings  upon  the  earth  a  pregnant  evil,  consign- 
ing its  development  to  time."  The  time  for  the  development  of  this 
mischief  was  brief.  The  word  was  uttered,  and  it  could  not  be  re- 
called :  the  principle  was  established,  which  it  was  too  late  to  rescind. 
The  disciples  of  the  new  apostles,  reading,  judging,  deciding,  became 
p2 


iH 


i«*n  A  •■•*   mw   *i''ti  w 
DEBATE    vlf    XniS 

■ipiiiii  tilt  Jiielves.  Tliey  claimed  the  rfgfit  their  teachers  eiereisetl. 

IpMf  aMunJ  It  to  chaige,  as  they  had  changed.  The  Lutherans, 
•iwliltlM  of  them,  became  CaMniste;  CaWinists,  Independents; 
ImlilMiliMilSt  Anabajptists ;  each  sect  the  prolific  parent  of  twenty 
mlitrs,  all  diierinf  from  one  another,  as  much  as  each  one  differed 
flUMi  its  parent— innovation.  Mark  now  the  inconsistency  to  which 
Hm  •vil  workiof  of  this  scheme  reduced  the  first  claimants  of  a  right 
IMilii»d  of  for  fifteen  centuries.  •*  Obey !"  they  now  cry  aloud,  with 
Itnor,  ••obey  your  superiors;  submit  to  the  pastors  whom  God  hat 
■fpoialeil  to  rule  the  faithful.  It  is  their  duty  to  instruct  you,  yours 
to  follow  the  guidance  of  their  wisdom."  ••  What,**  they  exclaimed, 
f  becomes  of  the  subordination  which  the  scriptures  so  frequently  en* 
|oin,  if  each  one  can  be  the  arbiter  of  his  own  belief!  What  becomes 
of  humiltty,  which  relieion  so  forcibly  inculcates,  if  every  individual 

Inesumes  to  be  an  oracle  and  a  jud^e  f  What  would  become  of  civil 
tw  and  social  harmony  and  order,  if  the  acts  of  our  legislatures  were 
Ml  to  the  interpretation  of  every  interested  litigant  1  Forbear !  for- 
bear !*•  Such  was  the  restraint,  as  every  one  knows,  which  Luther 
was  under  the  Inevitable  necessity  of  imposing  on  the  first  followers 
of  his  levolt,  in  order  to  counteract  the  effects  of  the  disastrous  prin- 
dplo  of  raeotal  emancipation,  so  highly  eulogized  when  it  was  first 
pfOelaiiUMl,  mm!  received  with  so  much  enthusiasm,  until  it  was  found 
to  bo  •  Wf  Btbel  of  the  confusion  of  a' I  creeds — another  name,  or 
tise  a  eloal,  for  deism  and  positive  infidelity.  When  we  reason  on 
principles  rightly  understood,  whose  immediate  bearings  and  remotest 
•ofliti|iienoes  have  been  exposed  to  the  examination  of  the  reflecting 
world,  for  the  list  three  hundred  years,  these  arguments  are  as  coo- 
•litifo  to^ay,  as  they  were  when  first  urffed ;  and  when  the  right  of 
amy  iiulifldual  to  believe  whatever  errors  ne  honestly  conceives  to  bo 
tmCha  H!¥ealed  in  scripture,  is  contested,  he  may  say  to  his  accusers. 
In  the  eloquent  language  of  the  Prot^tant  remonstrants  to  the  synod 


luat  lafoniiers,  declared  to  be  fallible;  and,  consequently,  to  exact 
•ibiniasiofi  to  its  dictates,  they,  with  great  consistency,  defined  to  be 
tyranny.  Thus  they  decided  with  regard  to  the  church  of  Rome ;  and 
you,  yourselves,  have  sanctioned  their  decision.  Why,  therefore,  ex- 
•Kiae  a  dortiination  over  us,  which  you  stigmatized  as  tyranny  in  a 
eiiifeh,  compared  t*»  whose  greatness  yon  dwindle  into  tnsignificaoco^ 
If  iaaialaiico  to  the  decisions  of  our  pastors  be  a  Grime,  then  let  us 
,«fl|ia  oat  the  stain  of  ow  origin,  and  run  back  together  to  the  fold  of 
Catholicity,  which  you  and  we  have  abandoned.  If  such  resistance 
w  no  crime,  why  require  of  ns  a  submission  which  we  do  not  owe 
|o«.  Allow  us  to  differ  from  you,  as  you  do  from  the  parent  church." 
From  tho  laanaweiable  logle  of  this  remonstrance,  the  conclusion 
fallows  irretiftibly :  I.  That  every  society  formed  on  Protestant  prln- 
dples,  being  essentially  fallible,  none  should  assert  the  inconpistent 
ppetension  of  controlling  feith  by  authority,  or  of  regulating  creeds, 
wider  pretence  of  superior  wisdom.  2.  That  no  such  society,  and, 
therefore,  no  individual,  in  such  society,  can  be  sure  of  being  in  the 
right,  as  long  as  his  Protestant  neighbor,  with  as  many  resources  of 
lif#fiitalioii,  and  as  piously  inclined  as  himself,  has  embraced  the  very 


SOMAN   CATDOLTC    KBLIGION. 


175 


eontrary  of  his  opinion.  3.  That  as  the  entire  system  is  based  on  tho 
possibility  of  each  one*s  being  mistaken,  where  the  most  learned  and 
pious  have  adopted  such  opposite  conclusions,  no  one  can  ever  make 
an  act  of  divine  faith,  which  is  incompatible  with  uncertainty,  and 
much  more  so  with  error.  4.  That,  as  long  as  such  a  principle  is  up* 
held,  there  is  no  hope  of  union,  no  security  ;  consequently,  that  either 
the  whole  system  is  false,  or  some  expedient  of  union  and  unity  muft 
be  discovered,  1o  induce  any  conscientious  and  rational  inquirer  after 
truth,  to  believe  that  the  Protestant  society  exemplifies  the  efllicacy  of 
the  prayer  of  Christ  for  his  disciples,  the  night  before  he  suffered,  that 
**  they  may  be  made  perfect  in  one.''*  We  entreat  our  readers  seriously 
to  look  into  the  different  religions  professing  to  have  been  founded  by 
Jesuff  Chrisl,  and  seriously  ask  themselves  the  question,  in  which  of 
all  these,  that  "perfect  oneness"  (which,  better  than  all  other  proofs, 
establishes  the  divinity  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  convinces  the  entire 
world  how  much  his  heavenly  Father  loved  him,  and  those  whom  he 
had  given  to  him)  may  be  found.  Let  not  this  inquiry  be  neglected, 
nor  yet  performed  lightly :  eternal  life  or  death  may  be  the  consequence 
ot  its  good  or  had  prosecution. 

Krror  in  religion,  when  it  results  from  the  neglect  of  sincere  and 
prayerful  enquiry,  is  criminal.  This  no  intelligent  Christian  will  de- 
ny. God  is  as  essentially  the  God  of  truth,  as  he  is  the  God  of  vir- 
tue. He  can  no  more  sanction  error,  than  he  can  tolerate  vice.  His 
right  is  as  absolute  to  the  submission  of  the  understanding,  as  to  the 
obedience  of  the  will;  and  as  he,  who  violates  one  commandment 
will  not  be  saved  for  the  observance  of  the  rest,  so  he  that  rejects 
one  truth,  which  Almighty  God  has  revealed — not  that  we  may  ex- 
amine, contest,  adopt  or  reject — but  that  we  may  believe  it,  has  lost 
the  merit  of  saving  faith.  It  is  to  fix  the  otherwise  perpetual  raria- 
tions  of  the  human  mind,  and  secure  the  anchor  of  our  faith,  not  in 
the  movioff  sands  of  man*s  vacillating  judsfments  and  uncertain  opin- 
ions, but  by  lodging  it  deeply  and  indissoTubly  in  the  rock  which  the 
Divine  Architect  has  made  the  foundation  of  his  church,  and  against 
which  the  winds  of  error  and  the  rain  of  dissolving  scandal  will  rap^e 
and  beat  in  vain,  that  the  Word  made  Fieth  Toochsafed  to  bec(»me  the 
Light  of  the  world. 

The  misfortune  of  the  great  majority  of  mankind  at  the  present 
day,  is  not  so  much  a  blind  fanatical  attachment,  (bad  as  thi )  is)  to 
the  sect  in  which  they  chanced  to  be  born,  or  were  first  instructed, 
as  a  certain  latitude  of  principle,  which  has  obtained  the  specious 
name  of  liberality,  and  which  resolves  itself  into  a  fatal  and  unrea- 
aonable  indifference  to  all  religions,  true  or  false.  The  infidel  who 
has  had  but  too  frequent  occasion  to  exult  at  the  success  of  a  wily 
system  of  hostility  to  revealed  truth,  affects  to  be  unable  to  restrain 
his  delight  at  beholdin?  oartVy  pervading  the  religious,  as  well 
as  the  physical  world.  Diversity  of  creeds  is  as  pleasing  to  his  eye, 
•s  the  discrepancy  of  features  in  the  human  countenance.  Incapable 
ei  reascniug,  out  of  tlie  sphere  of  matter,  of  which  it  is  his  inverted 
ambition  to  be  a  part,  he  holds  the  different  religions  professed  by 
men  to  be  so  many  institutions,  prescribing  for  eacii  country  a  uni- 
form manner  of  honoring  God  in  public;  all  founded  and  having  their 
peculiv  reasons  in  the  climate,  the  mode  of  govfjrnment,  the  geniua 


rs 


PKBATll    OIV    T'HB 


of  ihm  |efifle,  or  in  sodm  ntlier  local  caii«e,  whieli  renders  one  Ibm 
of  leligioii  Dieferable,  0r  them,  to  anotber. 

The  concliiiioii  to  be  drawn  from  this  doctrine,  in  is  mueh  as  It 
levels  all  distinctions  between  truth  and  falsehood,  ^ood  and  evil,  it 
hi  niliatinf  to  reason— but  the  infidel,  for  once  consistent,  recoile  not 
before  it :  me  following  is  his  language—-"  Sincerely  profess,  piously 

Eiaetise  the  religion  of  the  country  in  which  you  liye.  In  other  words, 
orn  in  a  pagan  country,  adore  its  gods — sacrifice  to  Jupiter,  to  Mar8« 
to  Priapus,  or  to  Apoflo.  In  Egypt,  you  will  render  divine  horora 
to  the  sacred  ox,  and  the  crocodile ;  in  Phenicia,  you  will  pass  ysur 
ehildren  through  the  fires  of  Moloch ;  jn  one  country,  you  will  im- 
molate human  victims  to  your  idol ;  in  another,  you  will  humbly  bow 
before  a  block  of  marble,  or  of  woo<l — before  an  animal,  fossil,  or  a 
plant  Be  not  afraid  ;  God  will  not  send  one  man  to  heaven  for  hav- 
ing been  born  in  Home,  nor  another  to  hell  for  having  been  born  in 
I  Constantinople.  Ilierefore,  in  the  latter  place  you  will  cry.  *  God  is 
God  and  Mahomet  is  bis  prophet;'  and  in  the  former,  you  will  ana- 
Iheniatise  the  impostor.  A  Christian  in  Europe,  a  Mussulman  in 
Persia,  an  Idolater  in  Congo,  on  the  banks  of  the  Ganges  an  adorei 
of  Vishnou,  let  not  truth  dictate  tlie  choice  of  your  religion,  but 
chance — let  not  reason  decide,  but  the  measurement  of  a  degree  ot 
latitide,  or  longitude.  Your  credulous  parent  paid  divino  honors  to 
an  onion ;  preserve  this  domestic  worship — a  son  can  never  do  wrong 
in  following  the  religion  of  his  father,"  But  all  this,  it  will  be  said, 
is  unworthy  of  God  and  degrading  to  man.  Not  at  all,  he  replies* 
all  religions  are  equal — you  were  bom  in  this,  to  practise  another  would 
be  presumption.  Such  is  the  reasoning  of  the  instructor  of  Emile, 
the  theology  of  Hobbes,  the  profession  of  faith  of  the  author  of  Zaire. 

**Chrfti«iinfidaiis  Parts,  Mumulnwiie  en  ces  lieux, 

J'sarois  tvec  la  Grec«  adorf  let  faus  Dfeui." 

11ia»  the  unbeliever  should  thus  eat  promiscuously  of  the  fruit  of 
the  tree  of  good  and  evil,  life  and  death,  should  not  create  surprise. 
Bis  joy  consists  in  his  being  able  to  doubt  of  the  validity  of  the  proofe 
of  religion— his  only  peace  in  life,  his  only  security  in  death  being 
made  to  depend  on  the  delusive  conviction  of  the  improbability  of  ever 
arriving  with  certainty  at  the  knowledge  of  revealed  truth — the  only 
Initl*,  aHer  all,  it  must  be  admitted,  which  it  is  necessary  for  man  to 
Inow— «nd  consequently  tlie  only  truth  which  God  is  bound  by  all  his 
essential  and  unchangeable  attributes  to  enable  us  to  attain. 

The  basis  of  Protestant  belief  is,  that  the  Scnpture,  this  book  ofdi* 
vine  revelation,  is  the  only  rule  of  faith ;  and  that  Jesus  Christ  having 
Wl  on  earth  no  livinfr  Infallible  authority  to  interpret  it,  every  man  is 
oblifed  to  expound  it,  for  himself,  or  in  other  words,  to  seek  in  it  th« 
lelipon,  In  which  he  is  to  live  and  by  which  he  must  be  saved.  Hin 
iwty  Is  to  believe,  what,  it  seem  to  Mm,  this  book  clearly  leaches  and 
what  as  far  as  he  has  ascertained  by  subjecting  it  to  the  test  of  privsl* 
examination,  eontradicts  not  Ms  reason :  and  as  no  man  has  a  right  to 
••I  toaiiother,  '*  my  reason  is  more  vigorous,  my  judgment  more  sound 
than  yours,"  it  follows  tnat  every  man  should  abstain  from  condemn- 
iiif  the  interpretation  of  another  and  should  consider  all  religions,  at 
least,  as  good  and  as  safe  as  his  own.  This  is  the  infidel  principle  in 
disguise.  The  Deist  takes  the  book  of  nature,  the  Protestant  takes 
Ihe^ible.    The  former  reads  in  Aia  book,  that  the  Supreme  Being  musi 


SOMAN  OATHOLIC    S£U6I0N. 


ITI 


be  pleased  with  the  diversity  of  worship  rendered  him  by  his  creaturcii 
that  no  one  is  to  be  more  accountable  for  errors  which,  however  discord- 
ant in  themselves,  when  softened  and  mellowed  by  being  mingled  with 
Ike  errors  of  others,  ascend  to  the  deity  in  the  grateful  harmony  of  uni- 
versal praise.  The  latter,  with  this  only  difierence  that  he  contracts 
the  range  of  the  Infiders  misapprehension  of  religion,  and  for  the  book 
of  the  universe  takes  the  bible,  contends  for  the  same  erroneous  prin- 
eiple. 

1  need  not  shew  its  workings  to  this  enlightened  audience.    The 
■TO  ruinous  in  the  extreme.— [Time  expired.] 


WEDNESDAY,  Jaauart  18th.,  HaJf-pa^  9  o'clock,  J,  Jf. 

Mr.  Camfskll  riae»— 

I  appear  before  you  this  morning,  fellow-citizens,  in  prosecution  of 
(ny  third  proposition  :  and  as  this  is  the  fifih  day  of  the  discussion, 
we  must  proceed  with  more  despatch.  We  shall  then  advance  direct- 
ly to  that  part  of  our  proposition  which  speaks  of  Roman  Catholic  uni- 
ty and  uniformity — only  intimating  to  my  hearers,  that  the  bishop's 
remarks  in  his  last  speech  upon  the  infallibility  of  tradition;  and  his 
effort  to  make  the  succession  of  the  popes  to  rest  upon  the  same  au»- 
thority  with  our  faith  in  the  bible,  will  be  disposed  of  under  proposi- 
tion the  6th. 

There  are  two  bonds  of  union  in  all  societies,  general  and  special,— 
the  first  connects  with  the  whole ;  the  second  with  a  part,  one  or  more 
individuals.  We  explain  by  examples:  1st.  Take  the  Turkish  em* 
pire.  It  is  united  on  the  divine  authority  of  the  Koran,  and  the  divine 
mission  of  Mahomet.  Acquiescence  in  these  is  the  general  bond  of 
union.  But  3nd.  There  are  special  bonds,  such  as  unite  the  respective 
orders  of  Mahometans,  as  the  orders  of  Ali  and  Omar.  These  orders 
are  distinct :  they  are  united  by  a  special  construction  of  tlie  Koran. 
Belief  in  the  Koran  is  like  general  attraction  :  agreement  in  a  particu* 
far  view  of  it  is  like  attraction  of  cohesion.  So  among  christians. 
Roman  Catholics  are  united  in  one  great  generic  idea  which  char.io- 
terizes  the  whole  sect.  That  is,  the  belief  in  a  supreme  head  of  the 
church  on  earth — a  vicar  of  Christ:  and  add  to  that,  the  exclusive 
power  and  authority  of  the  bishops.  **  Bishops  are  the  bond  of  union 
amongst  Catholics."  The  clergy,  indeed,  are  the  general  bond  of 
union  amongst  Romanists.  But  there  are  also  special  bonds  and  par- 
ties in  that  society,  of  which  we  shall  take  some  notice.  Protestants 
have  a  general  bond  of  union  in  a  generic  consideration,  as  distinguish- 
ing as  that  of  Mahometans  and  Roman  Catholics.  Ackm  wigging 
the  bible  alone,  as  the  only  perfect  and  sufficient  rule  of  faith  and  ma»> 
iiers,and  the  duty  of  all  mankind  to  examine  it  for  themselves,  accord- 
in?  to  their  respective  abilities  and  opportunities,  is  the  generic  charao- 
tertstic  of  Protestants.  It  is  one  of  the  general  ideas,  in  which  are 
united,  and  which  unites  all  Protestants.  But  in  the  second  place  they 
are  united  in  a  most  perfect  and  unanimous  renunciation  of  that  hier- 
archical authority  which  is  the  very  t^ssence  of  Roman  Catholicism. 
1  affirm  that  all  Protestants  are  as  perfectly  united  in  these  two  grand 
piinciples,  as  the  Roman  Catholics  are  iu  that  of  a  supreme  head  in 


m 


iii  i 


lome,  and  in  the  Wicf  of  tradition.  Different  sninte  md  their  . 
lisrlties  in  the  Roman  Catholic  chareh  areapecific  bonda  of  union,  aii4 
aa  much  heads  of  orders,  as  are  the  leaders  and  views  of  Proteatant 
iecia.  But  the  Protestants  are  as  much  united  in  acts  of  worship,  at 
Eoman  Catholics.  There  are  one  or  two  Protestant  sects,  who  diffei 
in  soaie  important  matters,  and  are  as  repugrnant  to  each  other  as  are 
lanaenista  and  Jesuits  in  the  Roman  church :  but  all  Protestant  sects 
mite  in  acferal  essential  acts  of  religious  worship — ^in  the  acknowl 
•ikineiit  of  the  same  cod©  of  morals,  and  in  the  uosiiite  institution 
of  Christianity,  such  as  the  Lord's  day,  the  Lord's  supper,  bapti«ii,. 
iifaftr,  praise,  Ac.  Sects  and  differences  eiist  which  ouarht  not :  but 
•till  they  harmonixe  as  much  in  their  general  and  special  bonds  of 
onion,  au  do  the  Romanists  themselves.  What  are  the  Augustiniana, 
Bominicans,  Franciscans,  Jansenists,  Jesuits,  &c.  but  orders  (or  sects) 
called  after  different  saints,  and  united  under  special  bonds  and  peeuli- 
•riiiea  !  Theae  parties  in  the  Roman  church  areas  pugnacious  as  Pro- 
lestant  pftffltM :  coinmuniiig  with  each  other  not  more  frequently,  nor 
■on  ooniiallf  Iham  do  Lutherans,  Calvinists,  Arminians,  &c.  They 
CMilitMi  wamily  affainst  each  other.  Their  quarrels  are  as  rank  and 
feice  as  those  of  Protestants.  But  this  it  not  all,  my  friends.  Their 
ily  is  divided  on  all  the  great  orthodox  points  of  Oatholicism. 


KOMAM  CATHOLIC  KBUOION. 


nti 


Some  say  the  pope  of  Rome  is  supreme  in  all  thinga  on  earth,  tempo- 
nl  Mid  •pirimtli  that  he  is  a  perfect  representative  of  all  the  power  of 
Christ,  ivligioui  and  political.  A  second  class  disavow  these  large 
claims — ihf^y  say  he  is  supreme  only  in  ecclesiastical  power :  but  thai 
lie  is  absolute  lord  of  the  church.  A  third  class  differ  again  on  the  ei- 
tent  of  that  ecclesiastical  supremacy.  Some  say  the  pope  is  above  and 
lieyond  the  councils  and  clergy  ;  and  that  he  can  annul  them  at  plea- 
aire.  A  fourth  party  say  he  is  subject  to  a  general  council,  and  is  on- 
ly a  leneral  snperiiilendent,  a  mere  president,  or  executive  officer— 
Ihat  iio  deoiiiii  oCeoiincils  are  the  euprprae  law,  and  that  the  pope 
merely  executes  them.  Here  are  four  distinct  sects,  on  the  generic 
idea  of  the  anpreme  head.  Again  there  are  four  parties  on  the  es&en 
ial  doctrine  of  infallibility.  .Some  aay  it  resiues  in  the  pope  alone. 
Bellmiine  saya,  (and  he  is  the  organ  of  a  principal  party,)  '*  that  the 

Cope  oififiol  pmmbiv  err.**  Gelasius  says,  **Th«  church  represented 
y  a  general  connctl  is  above  the  pope.**  A  third  party  say,  that  infal 
Hbility  resides  in  both  the  pope  and  a  general  council  united.  A  fourth 
■ay,  thstall  Ibis  does  not  conatitute  infallibility,  but  that  when  the 
whole  eharah  shall  have  acqnieaeed  in  a  decree,  and  signified  it  by  a 
concurrent  leapoBse,  then,  and  not  till  then,  aredofitiasand  decreet  io- 
iillibly  correot.  Tlie  fint  of  these  partiet  believes  in  the  eharch  tir- 
kmii  the  second  in  the  church  repcMfitoliee  f  the  third  in  the  church 
^ifiKt»ei-^he  fonrlh  in  ihechurchrefioiMteer— as  some  of  their  eanon> 
iait  have  taughL 

YMieidaf « in  dltenstinf  Infallihilliy,  I  taid  it  thoold  be  in  the  head, 
if  any  wleie.  My  friend  the  bishop,  aajt,  it  should  be  in  the  body  : 
and,  to  carry  out  the  figure,  if  infallibility  be  in  the  body,  the  head 
nmst  be  under  the  coutrol  of  the  body  :  for  the  fallible  mu^t  yield  to 
the  infallible.  Now,  the  body  is  the  animal  part  of  every  individual, 
the  teat  of  the  passions  and  affections ;  and  therefore  ought  to  be  under 
the  dominion  of  the  intellectual  and  moral  head  :  yet  this  theory  makes 
this  body,  the  sen->ual  and  animal  body  govern.    No  wonder,  then. 


ttial  the  Roman  Catholic  chnrch  is  always  eorrapl.  Bat  from  nature 
and  reasoB  and  revelation,  I  woold  incline  to  that  party  that  places 
the  government  in  the  head.  There  are  the  powers  of  government, 
and  there  ought  to  be  the  sceptre.  It  is  abhorrent  to  reason — nay  it  is 
father  monstrous,  to  have  the  head  under  the  dominion  of  the  body. 

Bat  I  hasten  to  show,  that  be  the  government  where  it  may,  in  the 
pope,  the  council,  or  the  whole  body,  it  is  always  fallible.  I  shall 
begin  with  the  head ;  and  here  we  have  pope  against  pope.  Adrian 
VL  did,  uneouivocally,  dittmn  the  pnpeh  ittfaiiibi/tty.  Now,  from  this 
tingle  fact,  1  prove  the  fallibility  of  the  pope;  for  Adrian  was  either 
right,  or  he  was  wrong.  If  right,  the  pope  is  fallible;  for  he  avows 
that  he  is.  If  wrong,  the  pope  is  fallible ;  for  he  was  a  pope  and  yet 
did  err.  This  is  a  dilemma  never  to  be  annihilated  nor  disposed  of. 
Pope  Stephen  VI.  rescinded  the  decreet  of  pope  Formosus.  Pope 
John  annulled  those  of  pope  Stephen,  and  restored  those  of  pope  Ste- 
phen. Sergius  III.  so  hated  Formosus  and  all  that  he  did,  as  pope, 
that  he  obliged  all  the  priests  he  ordained  to  be  re-ordained. 

Sometimes  popes  have  at  one  time  condemned  what  themselves 
passed  at  another  time ;  for  instance,  Martin  V.  confirmed  the  decree 
of  the  council  of  Constance,  which  set  a  general  council  above  the 

f>ope,  and  yet  he  afterwards  published  a  decree,  forhid.ling  all  appeals 
rom  the  pope  to  a  general  council.  He  was  certainly  fallible,  or, 
rather,  he  certainly  erred  in  one  case  or  in  the  other.  What  then  is  true 
of  one  pope  officially,  is  true  of  all  popes  officially,  and  in  proving  a 
few  regular  and  canonical  popes  to  be  fallible,  we  prove  them  all  to  be 

fallible. 

Is  the  second  opinion  belter— is  a  general  council  infallible  T  I  will 
atate  a  foct  or  two;  the  council  of  (fonstance  says  the  church  in  old 
times  allowed  the  laity  to  partake  of  both  kinds— the  bread  and  the 
wine,  in  celebrating  the  eucharist.  The  council  of  Trent  saya,  the  laity 
and  unofficiating  priests  may  commune  in  one  kind  only.  Here,  then, 
we  have  council  against  council.  In  the  time  of  pope  Gelasius  it  was 
pronounced  to  be  sacrilege  to  deny  the  cup  to  the  laity :  but  now  it  is 
nncanonical  to  allow  it.  The  fourth  council  of  Lateran,  A.  D.  I2I5, 
tays,  with  the  concurrence  and  approbation  of  pope  Innocent  III.,  that 
the  bread  and  wine  in  the  act  of  consecration  suffer  a  physical  change. 
Then  we  begin  to  read  of  transubstantiation.  Coun.  Lat  iv.  canon  1. 
••  Did  the  church  always  maintain  this  doctrine  1"  Nay,  verily,  for  a 
host  of  fathers ;  nay  the  whole  church  for  the  first  four  centuries  say 
••the  change  is  only  mora/,"— a  sanctification,  or  separation  to  a  spe- 
cial use.  Here  we  might  read  a  host  of  fathers,  if  we  thought  their 
testimony  necessary.  ITie  third  council  of  Lateran,  or  the  eleventh 
oecumenical  council,  has  decreed  that 

"  JVon  mtifi  direndn  svni  jnramenta  $ed  potws  petjftna  qua  contra  mitlA- 
(em  eccUs'MSlicain  d  sanctorum  palrum  veninnt  institatm."  Cuo.  Lat.  iii.  r.uui 
16  Ijahbif.  Council  Sacrosanct  vol.  ».  p.  1517.  ^     ^ 

Literally.  Ihejf  are  not  to  be  called  oaths,  InU  permneM,  which  are  iakm 
aenimt  the  interests  tf  the  church  and  the  holy  fathers. 

Now  does  not  this  contradict  Numb.  xxx.  2,  Lev.  xix.  \%  Deot.  xxiii. 
23,  Zech.  viii.  17,  Psal.  xv.  4,  and  Matthew  v.  ••Thou  shall  perform 
uoto  the  Lord  thine  oaths."  •    ,  -i 

Atrain,  the  second  council  of  Lateran,  the  tetdh  cecumenical  council, 
forbade  the  marriage  of  clergy.  /V  800  years  the  clergy  were  allowed 
to  marry!    For  the  first  600  years  one-half  the  canons  of  councils 


ROMAIC  CATHOLIC   BBUGION. 


181 


I   ■' 


1811  naiATS  Off  trb 

IMM  rafiMiif  tli«  ekrfy  at  to  the  affaiii  of  matri^ooy  and  oelibaey 
Th©  atidoBt  church  had  not  yet  learned  to  forbid  niarrtage  to  the  clergy 
for  with  Paul  the  clergy  yel  beliefed,  that  '^mamage  wis  honorablt 
iOi  all." 

I  liiife  thus  iliown  that  the  church  of  Rome  Is  not  uniform ;  and  need 
iPefkther  proof  that  she  is  mutable  and  faUible;^without  that  real  unity 
mi  uniformity  of  which  she  boasts  I  Have  we  not  found  pope  against 
impe,  council  against  council,  the  church  of  one  age  against  the  church 
of  another  age,  and,  by  the  acknowledgment  of  a  pope,  as  much  strift 
ml  party  m  amongst  Protestants. 

instead  of  reading  that  long  essay  yesterday,  (I  do  not  know  what 
it  was  about,  nor  who  wrote  it;  I  paid  uo  regard  lo  it,  it  beiii^  obvi* 
ously  read  to  fill  up  the  time)— I  say,  that  instead  of  such  readings,  I 
cipected  a  reply  to  my  remarks  on  infallibility,  or  on  some  of  the  great 
natters  yet  unnoticed ;  but  without  any  more  distinct  avowal  of  his 
Mion  of  infalMbiltty,  1  am  left  to  plod  my  way  as  before.  My  op- 
ponent admitt  kit  lailhis  not  the  bible  alone,  but  that  immense  library 
of  iMt  ill ftdlriifl  tffifl  iMrMkm  /oA'of,  already  mentioned.  But  as  he  is 
so  silent  on  this  point,  I  have  an  author  in  my  hand  whom  he  has  al* 
nady  commended  in  this  city  as  good  Roman  Catholic  authority ;  and, 
therefore,  I  quote  him  with  his  approbation.  He  has  these  135  folios  in 
Ms  eye;  and  on  the  question,  who  shall  interpret  for  public  use — theRt. 
'~    .  J.  F.  if.  Trevem,  D.  D.  bishop  of  Stiasburg,  late  of  Aire,  thuf 


**  if  flscb  of  Dt  was  obliged  to  distinguish,  among  man^  articles,  those  which 
come  from  tradition,  and  those  which  do  not,  he  would  hud  himstif,  in  a  general 
way,  condcnioed  to  a  labor  above  his  strength.  In  fad,  that  part  of  the  preach- 
inr  of  the  apostlts  which  they  did  not  commit  to  writiiir,  was  at  first  confided 
■olely  to  the  memory  of  the  faithful,  fixed  in  particular  cBurrhes  by  the  oral  in- 
itmcttons  of  the  irst  bbhops,  and  afterwards  collected  nartially  and  as  occasion 
Ml  oat,  in  Ch«  writinss  of  the  lalhan,  and  in  the  acts  or  the  synods  and  councib. 
Whenco  it  followi,  inat  to  prove  thai  such  an  article  is  truly  of  apostolic  tradi- 
tion, we  mat  consult  the  belief  of  the  particular  churches,  examine  carefully  th« 
tell  of  the  councils  and  the  voluminous  writing  of  the  fathers  of  the  Greek 
tad  Latin  church^.  Who  does  not  see  that  this  labor  requires  a  sjmre  of  time 
and  extent  of  erudition,  that  renders  it  in  general  impracticable?  There  are, 
indeed,  to  be  found,  men  of  extraordinary  capacity  and  apDlkation,  whose  taste 
■ad  inclination  lead  them  to  this  kind  of  research;  with  the  aid  of  the  rules  of 
criticism,  all  founded  upon  good  sense,  they  balance  and  weigh  authorities,  they 
diitinfuish  between  what  the  fathers  taught,  as  tiidividnai  teachers,  and  what 
they  iepoae  as  testifiers  to  the  belief  and  practice  oi  their  time,  and  they  attach 
will!  discrimination  the  different  degrees  of  credibility  that  are  duc:,  whether  to 
their  doctrine  or  their  deposition.  The  world  is  well  aware  that  such  labor 
is  calculated  but  for  a  small  number:  and  again,  after  all  how  successful  soever 
it  may  be,  it  scarcely  ever  leads  to  inconte«tible  couclusfons.  We  therefore  ar« 
in  want  of  mmm  other  means  that  may  enable  us  altogether  with  certainty  to 
anrive  at  the  apostolic  and  divine  traditional  The  question  is,  what  it  this 
■mmmf  ••  •  •  #  »  a  a  « 

Our  author  proceeds : 

**  The  same  judre,  the  same  interpreter  that  nnfoldt  to  ns  the  sense  of  the 
divine  books,  nianiiest  to  us  also,  that  of  tradition.  Now.  this  judge,  this  inter- 
preter,^ I  must  tell  yon  here  again,  is  the  teaching  body  of  the  church,  the  bish- 
opa  nnilad  in  the  sane  opinion,  at  least  in  m  great  majority.  It  is  to  tlieni  that 
in  the  person  of  the  apostles,  were  made  the  magnificent  promises:  **  Cit>  tracli, 
1  am  with  you ;  he  that  heareth  you,  heareth  ma.  The  Spirit  of  truth  shall  teach 
you  alt  truth,"  &c.  They  alone  then,  have  the  right  to  teach  whHt  is  revealed, 
to  declare  what  is  the  written  or  unwritten  word:  they  alone  al«o  have  atwayi 
bren  iu  possession  of  the  exercise  of  it.  No  other  ecclesiastics  have  cverurw- 
tuided  to  it,  w hatever  have  bfl«ii  their  rank,  their  dignity,  and  learning.    Thef 


tfiay  he  contnlted  and  beard ;  it  is  even  proper  this  should  be  done,  and  it  always 
hn  been  done;  lor  tbay  form  th«  council  of  the  biihopa,  and  their  eroditioo  ac- 

a aired  by  long  study,  tlirows  light  upon  the  discussions.  But  as  they  have  not 
le  plentitude  of  the  priesthood,  they  are  not  meiubers  of  the  eminent  body  that 
has  succeeded  the  college  of  the  apostles,  and  with  it  received  the  promises.** 
Vol.  I.  pp.  168,  169. 

So  then,  to  quote  his  words,  as  found  on  p.  lOR,  "Theopinwia 
adopted  by  the  majority  of  the  bishops  are  for  all  an  infallible  rule  of 
foith  !*•    That  is,  "I  believe  in  the  holy  Catholic  church." 

But  the  priesthood  are  sworn  "to  interpret  the  scriptures  according 
to  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  fathers."  And  if  they  do  not,  the 
people  that  believe  them  are  innocent ! !  But  how  can  they  unless 
they  eiamine  all  these  fathers!  And  what  living  man  has  read  theae 
135  folios,  with  or  without  much  eare?  In  what  a  predicament  is  the 
eonseienee  and  faith  of  this  people !  Here  is  a  task,  which  !  say, 
never  was,  or  can  be,  performed  by  man.  The  bishop  can  only  filial 
his  oath  by  teaching  what  the  Catholic  church  teaches.  We  have  our 
Old  and  New  Testament  without  the  apocrypha.  They  have  the  bible, 
the  apocrypha,  and  135  folios.  Let  us  now  compare  the  Roman  and 
Protestant  rules  and  interpretations !  Both  rules,  for  the  sake  of  argu- 
ment, be  it  observed,  need  interpretation.  But  it  so  happens,  that 
a  Protestant  bishop,  and  a  Roman  Catholic  bishop,  are  equally  fallible, 
my  opponent  being  judge.  As  the  stream,  theh,  cannot  rise  above  the 
fountain,  botli  interpretations  are  fallible.     Are  we  not  equal ! 

Where  do  you  find  an  infallible  expositor  of  the  bible  1  says  the 
Roman  Catholic.  I  answer.  Where  do  you  find  an  infallible  exposi- 
tor of  these  volumes!  You  have  a  more  difficult  task,  and  no  better 
help,  than  we.  The  Protestants  say  that  God  can  speak  as  intelligibhr 
as  the  pope,  and  that  he  is  as  benevolently  disposed  as  any  priesthood. 
He  does  not  require  an  infallible  expositor;  he  is  his  own  exp4.sitor. 
His  Spirit  is  the  spirit  of  knowledge  and  eloquence,  and  can  si.'^k 
intelligibly  to  every  listener.  As  well  might  we  say,  that  he  wlo 
made  Uie  eye  cannot  see,  as  that  he  who  gave  man  mind  and  speech  ean- 
not  address  cleariy  and  intelligibly  that  mind  of  which  he  is  the  author . 
I  ask  the  Romanist,  however,  on  his  own  principles,  where  is  his  in* 
fallible  expositor  of  these  135  volumes  !  I  request  a  categorical  ansT'sr. 

Bishop  P.  A  general  council,  or  the  pope,  with  the  acquie6i:ai.6a 
of  the  church  at  large. 

Ma.  C.  How  do  we  approach — ^where  shall  we  find  this  coonci!  1 
It  has  not  met  for  two  hundred  and  seventy-five  years.  How  can  they, 
therefore,  settle  a  point  between  the  bishop  and  me!  Every  age  has 
its  enors  and  divisions.  Every  individual  has  his  doubts.  Ought 
there  not  to  be  a  general  council  eternally  in  session  !  If,  then,  there 
IS  none — no  infallible  expositor  extant ;  wherein  is  the  Romanist,  with 
all  his  proud  assumption,  superior  to  the  Protestant!  It  was  three 
hundred  and  twenty-five  years  from  Christ  before  the  first  general 
council ;  and  it  is  two  hundred  and  seventy-five  years  since  the  last 
general  council  of  Trent ;  and  the  church  has  been  $ix  hundred  t/ean, 
at  two  periods,  without  an  infallible  expositor!  To  show  the  equality 
of  the  two  parties,  suppose  a  Jew  were  converted  to  Christianity. 
Suppose  he  had  heard  of  just  two  sects  of  Christians ;  all  the  rest 
being  annihilated,  but  the  Roman  Catholic  and  the  Protestant.  Ho 
has  read  the  New  Testameut.  He  wishes  to  join  the  church.  He 
goes  to  the  Roman  Catholic  bishop,  and  says :  "  I  see  two  churches, 

Q 


im 


mrnkkTE  OK   THK 


■OMAN   CTATIIOLIC    RJSUGION. 


183 


II 


a- 


i ' 


•iff:  I  don*!  1mm  whieli  to  Jolii.  I  md  thM  thcro  it  but  one  trn* 
lAiwIi.''  Wb«t  do«t  llw  WtlMf  wifOiHl !  ••  «if ,  j^  owfjit  to  jam 
our  clionsli.*'  Tlw  Jew  biIch,  "  Vinir  reiraom,  sirl  for  th«  Protestant 
also  sayt,  I  ought  to  join  his  church."  The  bishoo  shows  him J^teen 
HMrit  ^tJke  trueehurtk.  He  says,  "  Eead  the  Bible,  and  see  if  these 
mila  are  not  eharMsteristie  of  ut ;  and  thoa  judge  for  yourself."  Ha 
iida  Ibtaa  laarks  involfo  the  principal  part  of  the  New  Testament* 
lie  reada,  bowever,  and  joins  the  church.  Has  he  not  df^cided  thia 
auestion  by  examining  the  holy  scriptures  1  Has  he  not  interpreted 
iir  hioiselt'l  Is  not  the  bishop  so  far  a  true  Protestant !  or,  baa  ho 
only  becooie  Proiaalaal  for  the  purpoae  of  introducing  this  proselyte! 
Theio  ia  uo  gettiuf  out  of  this  diiioulty.  I  trust  my  good  frieed  will 
not  paaa  it  with  a  laugh,  and  a  bold  aaaertion,  as  usual.  Has  he  not 
in  thia  lOMMineed  his  own  principlaB«  and  turned  Protestant,  for  Iha 
take  of  gaining  the  Jew  1 

But,  when  the  Jew  has  entered  the  church,  and  the  bishop  has  told 
bim  he  muat  now  believe  as  the  church  believes,  for  he  cannot  under- 
ataud  tba  Bible :  •'  What !"  responds  the  Jew ;  **8ir,  have  I  not  deci- 
ded the  greataat  4|a«atioo  to  me  in  the  universe  I  I  believed  in  Jesus, 
and  1  have  found  lAe  'ime  tkurek  by  exercising  my  own  judgment  on 
the  teriptures ;  and  can  I  not  now  judge  of  minor  questions  I"  May 
I  not  again  aay,  that  the  two  systems  are  perfectly  equal  I  The  eter^ 
nal  circle  of  vicious  logic— you  must  believe  the  scriptures  on  the 
authority  of  the  church,  then  the  church  on  the  authority  of  the 
aerif  tares :  oTt  you  muat  aal  at  did  the  aforesaid  Jew,  on  the  ad  vie* 
of  tlio  biabop.  There  in  aol  a  middle  eourse.  My  learned  antagonist 
cannot  show  you  a  middle  wa^.  But  I  have  not  yet  done  with  this  great 
tbama.  1  wiab  to  display  in  other  attitudea,  tbete  two  **  rulea  of 
imI." 

And,  first,  I  thai!  aketcb  the  Protestant  rule.  Its  attributea  are 
aeven.  1.  Ji  h  impired,  3.  //  tt  authoriiaiive.  3.  It  u  inUMgibk* 
4.  Jf  ft  aioni/.  5.  B  u  perpdual,  %.  M  it  mikoHc  7.  M  is  pafeeL 
We  wail  now  prove  tbit. 

L  It  is  inspired:  for,  ^^Jhfywtm  of  Gi>df**  taya  Paler,  "^pdb  m 
ll<y  men  momd  %  iAe  ifo/y  ^'rt/." 

5.  Aniboiilatif e.  **  The  word  that  /apeak  to  yon,  shall  judge  yon 
in  the  last  day,"  says  the  Lord  from  heaven. 

3.  Intelligible.  To  the  Epbeaiaii  eonverta  be  aaith,  *'  When  yon 
read,  you  may  underatand  my  knowledpfo  in  the  mystery  of  Christ.** 

4.  Moral.    **  The  word  of  the  Lord  is  pura,  lejoicing  the  heart." 
&  Perpetual.    «*  The  word  of  the  Lord  endureth  for  ever;  and  thia 

ia  'the  word  whieh  baa  been  aaaiMMed  to  you  aa  glad  tidings." 

6.  Oatbolic.  ^  He  that  is  of  God,  beareth  God^t  word."'  "  Preach 
the  word."    **  Preach  the  gospel  to  every  creatare." 

7*  Perfect.  ^  From  a  child  thou  hast  known  the  holy  acripturea, 
mMek  mm  Me  la  wmkt  Ikee  wim  to  wakmiumJ**  '^  All  scripture  given  by 
inspiration  of  God,  is  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  correction,  for  instruct 
lion  in  righteousness,  thonm^khfumiaked  to  every  good  wtfrV^ 

All  Christendom  assents  to  this.  My  opponent  admits  the  bible  to 
be  inspired.  His  rule  makes  his  church  a  sect;  for  only  a  part  be- 
lieve in  his  traditions.    All  ebristiana  admit  our  rule  of  the  bible. 

It  it  |>ei/ed.  Such  is  tbe  Protestant  rule.  Now  for  the  Romanist 
rule !    The  bible  being  a  part  of  the  Roman  Catholic  rule,  is  such 


only  aa  expbiiied  by  the  apocrypha,  tbe  traditions  of  the  fatbera,  tba 
decfeea  and  caaoaa  of  cooaeila,  or  in  the  handa  of  bishops  s  ao  com* 
pletely  humanized,  aa  to  lose  all  its  peculinr  attributes,  and  is  made 
to  partake  of  all  the  characters  of  the  mediums,  through  which  it  ia 
given  to  that  people ;  and,  therefore,  of  the  i»  hole  Roman  Catholic 
rule,  the  attributes  are  just  the  opposite  of  those  seven  of  the  P«k 
teatant*8. 

I.  It  is  uninspired :  consequently,  being  human,  it  can  have  do  au- 
thority over  the  conscience  ;  and  this  makes  it 

3.  Unauthoritative.  God  alone  is  Lord  of  the  conscifnce,  and  no 
man  can  make  a  law  to  govern  it.  Hence  a  christian  never  can  be 
subordinate  to  any  institution  in  rdigion,  that  wants  the  aanetioa  of 
divine  authority. 

3.  Unintelligible.  No  man  can  erer  find  time  to  examine  all  the 
creed  of  Roman  Catholics.  It  is  constantly  accumulating ;  and  if  any 
one  bad  time  to  read  it  all,  he  never  could  understand  iu 

4.  Immoral.  This  is  that  attribute  h  hich  1  witih  spttrially  to  con- 
sider. The  other  properties  are  all  cons*»qurnces  of  those  already  no- 
ticed. But  this  demands  a  candid  and  faithful  examiuation.  It  givps 
me  no  pleasure  to  dwell  upon  this  theme,  to  expatiate  on  the  immoral 
character  of  the  papistic  rule  of  faith.  Tis  here,  indeed,  we  find  the 
loot  of  the  manifold  corruptions  of  that  institution ;  and  as  I  came  hero 
not  to  flatter,  but  to  oppose  error  and  defend  truth,  it  is  my  duty  con- 
tcientiottsly  and  benevolently  to  expose  the  immoral  tendencies  of  ifaia 
tystem. 

We  have  heard  the  gentleman  say,  be  was  glad  of  an  opportunity  to 
discuss  Catholicism,  to  make  Protestants  understand  better  its  peculiar 
doctrines.  I  wish,  myself,  to  hear  his  expositions,  to  see  if  he  can 
make  it  more  acceptable.  Therefore,  I  shall  endeavor  to  tell  my  story, 
candidly  and  faithfully,  and  give  him  the  opportunity  he  desires.  This 
is  my  first  effort  against  Romanism.  It  was  not  of  my  selection  or 
aeeking,  that  I  now  appear  before  you :  but  as  I  am  providentially,  aa 
I  regard  it,  on  this  arena,  I  shall  reveal  to  you  some  of  the  secreu  of 
that  institution,  which  seeks  to  be  rooted  in  this  Protestant  soil.  I 
aball  attempt  tliis  in  tbe  best  spirit:  for  I  wish  to  see  my  opponent 
honorably  wipe  from  his  escutcheon  any  stain  of  the  kind,  that  I  may 
allege.  On  these  points,  1  shall  be  happy  to  be  assured  that  hia  sys- 
tem is  better  than  we  Protestants  can  now  regard  it. 

I  aay,  then,  the  Roman  Catholic  mle  of  faith  it  immoral,  Tbis,  my 
friciida,  ia  a  serious  and  weighty  charge,  and  deserves  to  be  clearly  and 
fully  sustained.  Before  displaying  my  proof,  I  will  only  premise, 
that  auricular  confession,  penance,  the  maas,  absolution,  and  other 
parta  of  the  system  will  pass  before  us  in  this  alle^tion,  sustaining 
which,  will  anticipate  some  of  our  labors  on  the  other  propositions. 

I  shall  fin^t  read  from  the  Catechism  of  the  council  of  Trent  on  the 
power  of  the  priesthood  to  forgive  sin,  according  to  their  rule  of  faith* 
Auricular  confession,  is  by  thia  infallible  council  declared  ^  necessary 

for  the  remission  of  sins.** 

**  The  voice  o»  the  priest,"  «yi  the  cooncil  of  Trent,  who  is  Ic^imately  con- 
•tituted  a  minsster  for  the  reiiiisaioD  ofsios,  is  to  be  heard  as  that  of  Christ  him- 
■elf,  who  said  to  tbe  huue  man,  ••  Son^  U  of  good  cheer^  thy  ein*  ar«/>rgi9m 
Hue:*    Cat.  Council  of  Trent,  p.  180. 

Penance  by  the  same  council  is  thus  defined : 

FuBM  or  FfiAAWCE. — **  Penance  ii  the  channel  through  which  the  blood  ol 


OITBATB   UN   TRB 


MOMAN   CATHOLIC   RSUGION. 


185 


II 


» 


'  i 


iteint  coatnietwi  ftAttr  baptMoi.*' 
kw.  gmnted  bf  iIm  pmm,  m  tliit{ 


'inlo  tlw  tool,  and'  wailut  away  tlw : 
Iii  .ik     '**  TiM  fbnB  of  tike  abMltttioo  or  pwiliMi. 
••  I  Ai:iOi.fB  'THBB.'*     Id.  p.  111. 

Tk«  piiiwt  aijrs  posiUTolj,  **Iabmhe  ikeeJ**'  UDlilie  the  antliority 
nfiiiDi  wlo  tneiwtlr  declared  the  leper  clean,  he  claims  leally  and 
tplf  to  abaolre.    The  couocil  declares : 

**  Uiili»e  the  authority  g^iven  to  the  priettt  of  the  old  law,  to  declare  the  leper 
cleansed  from  his  leorotjt  the  power  with  which  the  priests  of  the  new  law  are 
invested,  is  not  simplj  to  declare  that  sins  are  forgiven,  but  ms  fAe  minis lert  qf 
God  rmlly  to  mhtohefrom  mmJ*    Id.  p.  182. 

TIm  fiiestSi  theii,  m  ike  mtmairrf  tf  God,  really  abmlve  from  mn 
And  MM  iMkot  still,  the  prinst  is  said  not  oolj  to  represent  Christ 
IM  miaaiiliafffe  the  fimcttoiis  of  Jesus  Christ: 

H  ,g^  ^1^  g^  -^  ^1^^  ttdniinittratioD  of  this  sacrament,  also  denumd  the  •«?{• 
ons  atteulion  of  the  iaithful.  Humbled  in  spirit  the  sincere  penitent  casts  him* 
wlfdown  at  the  feet  of  the  priest,  to  testifr,  by  this  his  humble  demeanor,  that 
he  acfciKMrledfes  the  necessiity  of  eradicatmg  pride,  the  root  of  all  those  enor- 
mities which  he  now  deplores.  Jb  the  minister  nfOod^  who  sits  in  the  tribunal 
Sffemmme  m  hi*  legiti.mate  judge,  he  venerates  the jKnccr  mmd  permm  ^mtr  Lord 
«M«  Ckriei;  lor  in  the  administration  of  this,  as  in  that  of  the  other  sacraments, 
ike^prieel  represents  the  character,  and  discharges  the  functions  ofJesm  Christ,'* 
Coun.  Trent,  p.  182^ 

all  sin: 

erroneoDS,  or  howe* 
does  not  remit"    Id.  p.  183. 

to  claim  the  most  servile  obodi^ 

pisst 

**If  tiierefofv,  we  read  in  the  pages  of  inspiration,  of  some  who  earnestly  im- 
l^orad  the  mercy  of  God,  but  implored  it  in  vain,  it  is  because  they  did  not  repent 
iineerelv,  and  from  their  hearts.  When  we  also  meet  in  the  sacred  scriptures, 
and  ill  the  writings  of  the  fathers,  passages  which  seem  to  say  that  some  sins  ara 
irremissible,  we  are  to  nnderstand  such  passages  to  mean,  that  it  is  very  difficult 
to  obtain  the  pardon  of  then.  A  disease  may  oe  said  to  be  incurable,  when  the 
patient  loatbce  the  medkine  that  would  accomplish  his  cure;  and,  in  some  sense, 
■Hale  sins  may  be  said  to  be  irremissible,  when  the  sinner  rejects  the  grace  of 
{2od,  the  proper  medicine  of  salvation."    Id.  ib.    '*  The  penitent  mtist  submU 


Again  Roman  Catholics  teach  that  penance  remits ; 
••lliere  is  no  sin,  however  grievous,  no  crime,  however  < 
ver  frequently  repealed,  which  penance  doc 

TIms  is  the  proper  groand  on  which 

mm  m  wB'  fmsts : 


Mmmyio  the  judgment  ^the  priest  who  is  the  vicegerent  of  God."    ib.  p.  183. 
"*'      '        "  ifess  once  a  yeai 

ling  to  ire  canon  of  the  council  of  Lateran,  which  begtm:  Owmes, 


Therefore,  all  must  confess  once  a  year. 
"According  to  tl-.e  canon  of  the  council  of  I 
Wtrimque  sexut,  it  couimands  all  the  ^ttifnl  to  confess  their  sins  at  least  once  ■ 

|«r*"    .Id.  o,  193. 

fiut  this  immoral  law  presumes  farther  yet.  It  changes  the  laws  ol 
God,  and  dtvideR  sins  into  venial  and  mortal,  and  fixes  the  price.  As 
•very  thing  depends  upon  the  authority  of  these  allegata  I  have  hitherto 
fttoted  ftom  the  catechism  of  the  council  of  Trent,*  I  now  introduce 
une  of  the  most  popular  of  the  saints  of  the  modem  church.  This 
taint  Ligori  was  sainted  bv  saint  Pius  VII.  that  best  of  modem  popes, 
who  restored  the  order  of  the  Jesuits,  and  the  **  Holv  Inquisition.*' 
Saint  Ligori  writes  the  moral  theology  of  the  churoh  of  Rome  in  some 
eight  or  nine  volumes :  and  so  orthodox,  that  bis  works  are  owned  al- 
iiflet  hv  every  nriesL  I  quote  from  a  synopsis  of  that  system  of  which 
we  shall  hereafler  sfieak  more  particularly.  We  shall  hereafter  beat 
the  saint  in  his  definitions  of  sins. 

•*Thii  is  a  mortal  sin,"  sa^s  Lirori,  "  which, i»ii  account  of  its  enormity,  de- 
•troji  the  grace  and  friendship  ofGod,  and  deserves  eternal  punishment.  It  is 
called  mortal,  because  it  deatroys  the  principle  of  spiritual  life,  which  is  habitual 
grace,  and  kilU  the  soul. 

•  Sm  Oateeliifiii,  connetl  of  Trent,  as  rovissi  bv  John  Hughes  of  nHaielphia,  nriosi  af 
it.  loin's  chareh,  pp.  lia.  t»3.  *^ 


Venial  ^in  is  that  which,  on  account  of  its  levity,  does  not  destroy  the  graoa 

id  friendship  of  God  although  itdimiaishes  the  lervor  of  charity,  and  deserves 
a  temporal  punishment  It  is  called  venial,  because  the  pnncipL-  of  the  spiritoal 
life,  grace,  beinr  still  sound,  it  affects  the  soul  with  languor,  that  is  easily  cured^ 
tlM  pardon  of  which  is  easily  obtained."   Ltgor.  lib.  v.  n.  51.  [Synopms,  p.  SO. 

The  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  faith  erects  a  tribunal  of  confession  un- 
known in  scripture,  and  commands  all  to  come  to  it  at  least  once  a 
Tear.  It  moreover  institutes  a  new  office  called  confessor,  unknown 
in  the  New  Testament,  and  gives  to  him  the  office  of  a  father,  a  phy- 
sician, a  teacher,  and  a  judge. 

"  The  ottices  that  a  good  confessor  is  bound  to  exercise,"  '*  are  four:  namely, 
those  of  Father,  Physician,  Teacher,  and  Judge"    Ligor.  Theol.  T.  viii.  p.  7. 

Tlie  confessor  forgives  all  sins  on  confession,  even  the  sin  against 
the  Holy  Spirit: 

"Thtre  is  no  sin,  however  grievous,  no  crime  however  enormous,  or  however 
frequently  repeated,  whkb  penance  does  not  remit."  Cat.  Conn.  Trent,  p.  183. 

Fbnancb  here  means  the  "  Tribunal  of  confession :"  for  this  tri- 
bunal is  sometimes  called  simply  ^^ confession,^''  **The  sacrament  of 
confession :"  at  other  times  it  is  called  the  "  tribunal  of  penance." 
Sometimes  simply  **  Penance,"  and  he  who  confesses  is  called  "  the 
penitent."  But  satisfactions  and  penances  are  to  be  apportioned  ac- 
cording to  the  discretion  of  the  priesL 


nevertheless  the  confessor,  for  just  reasons,  can  diminish  the  penances,  provided 
the  penitent  is  affected  with  violent  compunction,  or  if  it  be  during  the  time  of 
a  jubilee,  or  a  plenary  indulgence,  and  especially,  if  he  labor  under  any  infirmi 
ly  of  body  or  mind.  And  lastly,  (to  be  brief,)  always  whenever  a  prudent  fear 
IS  entertained,  lest  the  penitent  would  not  perform  penance  due  to  his  sins. 
Such  is  the  common  doctrine  taught  by  the  doctors,  with  St.  Thomas."  Ligor. 
Prax.  Con.  N.  ii. 

But  Still  worse:  this  immoral  law  or  rale  of  faith  repeals  and  annuls 
certain  positive  divine  laws.  I  have  here  two  catechisms,  published 
Dy  the  authority  of  the  church.  They  have  both  expunged  wholly  the 
second  commandment ;  so  that  it  should  not  stand  in  the  way  of  pay- 
ing reverence  to  images.     [Time  expired.] 

Ha^past  10  o'clock.  A,  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises— 

If  my  friend,  Mr.  Campbell,  has  failed  to  establish  against  the 
Catholic  church,  a  single  one  of  those  propositions,  which  have  been 
to  conspicuously  before  the  public  for  the  last  two  or  three  months, 
and  if  I  have  established  two  or  three  of  ihem  against  his  own  vague 
theory,  it  is  not  for  want  of  splendid  abilities  on  his  part,  or  the  pos- 
session of  them  on  mine.  The  reason  of  his  failure,  is  the  inherent 
weakness  of  the  cause  he  advocates,  as  the  trae  secret  of  my  success, 
is  to  be  found  in  the  impenetrable,  diamond  strength  and  beauty  of  the 
Institution,  which,  in  an  evil  hour  for  his  past  glory  as  a  controvereial- 
ist,  he  volunteered  to  attack.  He  has  this  day  (and  again  I  thank  him) 
brought  up,  for  discussion,  the  most  important  subject  that  can  occupy 
or  engross  the  attention  of  this  enlightened  audience,  viz.  the  rale  of 
faith.  If  fairly  published,  as  I  have  every  reason  to  believe  this  con* 
troversy  will  be,  it  will  send  forth  sound  and  useful  information, 
through  the  whole  length  and  breadth  of  the  land,  upon  a  topic  of  the 
most  vital  interest  \  and  I  will,  most  joyfully,  meet  Mr.  C.  on  that 


Qd 


24 


IflD'  WBBATM  ON  VBS 

f—iiiwif  fbr  I  Imil  with  exvltation  snch  an  opportnnitj  of  dispelliiifl 
|in|liili!e  and  misunderstanding  with  regard  to  our  real  principlM*  / 
wiu  give  emiMgmieal  answer*  to  ail  ike  questiom  he  hat  propounded ; 
mud,  therefore,  do  I  take  up  the  aubj^ct  he  haa  been  pleaaed  to  touch. 
1.  He  saya,  the  methoda  of  electing  the  pope  are  Tarious«  Bnt  lei 
that  paaa :  the  method  ia  nothing.  It  ia  with  his  authority  we  are  eon* 
otiiied.  He  has  watted  much  ume  in  building  up  a  house  of  sand,  to 
■Imiw  how  eaaily  he  eouki  demoUtk  It,  by  showing  that  the  pope  ia 
not  inJillible;  whereas,  I  haTe  repeatedly  told  him,  that  the  Catholic 
•iniieh  hat  nerer  taught  that  the  pope*8  infallibility  was  an  article  of 
Mtlii  Metpoke  of  some  more  or  leas  important  but  unessential  points  of 
iiiliiiW' of  opinion  between  Dominicans  and  Jesuits.  But  he  should 
hate  ehown,  to  establish  the  proposition  before  this  house,  that  these  or* 
dcrs  disagree  with  regard  to  articles  of  faith.  Their  minor  differences  are 
nothing,  so  long  as  they  implicitly  believe  every  article  of  faith  revealed 

af  aiiiifhty  God  and  proposed  for  iheir  belief  by  the  church,  which  they 
I  hear,  and  which  they  regard  as  the  "  pillar  and  ground  of  the 
truth."  This  is  the  solid  and  immovable  foundation  of  their  union. 
The  case  of  the  cup  given  to,  or  withheld  from,  the  laity,  as  I  have 
•lieady  told  him,  is  one  merely  of  discipline.  It  may  now  be  gtvea, 
m  eol,  at  the  pop  may  see  cause.  In  the  time  of  Gelasius,  it  waa 
pKMwmioed  tacrilege  to  deny  the  cup  to  the  laity ;  and,  if  all  my 
Mareit  had  lead  church  history,  I  need  not  tell  them,  it  Was  because 
«f  the  leaven  of  Manicheism  still  working  in  pretended  communi- 
cants, who  forbade  the  use  of  wine  as  coming  from  the  evil  principle.  No 
Ikiher  of  the  church,  however,  said,  that  the  consecration  of  the  eucharis- 
tic  species,  is  a  mere  *  separation,'  or  the  change  only  a  •  moral  change.' 
I  itfy  him  to  the  proof.  Mr.  C.  says :  "  So  far  Protestants  and  Cath- 
olics are  eoual ;"  for,  that  they  have  also  a  grand  generic  principla 
vi« :  that  the  Bible  is  their  rule  of  faith,  and  the  Bible  alone.  Now, 
Itake  up  the  organ  of  a  numerous  body  of  christians,  the  Christian 
Filladium,  and  I  meet  him  here  with  a  strong  argument  in  my  favor, 
npon  this  principle.  Speaking  of  Mr.  Campbell,  (f  mean  by  this  no  per- 
Bomslily,  that  can  be  thought  invidious  :  1  intend  none)  the  editor  ob- 
•iffes :  •*  He  freonently  speaks  of  *  ike  Bible  alone ,'  but  this  is  not  a 
tem  used  generally  by  the  brethren  in  New  England,  and  Is  taught 
by  few  elegit  Mr.  C.  We  never  knew  our  brethren  to  boast  of  walk- 
ing by  the  Bible  ahne.  This  wi  nsoARO  as  an  irkor,  i.rr  who  wili. 
fwcLAiii  IT.  We  say,  give  us  the  Bible,  but  not  alone.  Let  ijs  have 
*  Goo,  A  Christ,  a  Spirit,  ahd  a  ministrt  accompanving  it.  There 
was  a  law  given  to  the  Jews,  and  also  a  testimony,  which  they  were 
bonnd  to  observe.  The  teaiimonv  nf  the  inspired  prophdi  did  not  con' 
irmHei  the  law,  but  taught  and  enforced  the  same  truths.  The  ancients 
were  t©  walk  by  the  law  and  the  testimony^  which  was  called  a  word, 
(Is.  viii.  20.)  What  this  *•  redoubtable  captain"  of  rrform  says,  of 
sailing  sometimes  under  this  flag  and  sometimes  under  that,  is  per- 
fectly applicable  ti^-"  but  I  will  not  read  further :  this  is  sufficient 
for  ay  argnment.  The  Bible  alone  Is  not  the  rule  of  faith  to  all  Pro- 
fcalaitla.  Quakers,  Mormons,  &c.,  think  not  so,  as  I  have  already 
proved.  And,  now,  Mr.  Campbell  can  do  infinitely  more  with  the  in- 
lelJects  of  his  hearers,  than  the  pope  has  ever  done  with  those  of  Cath- 
olics, if  he  can  persuade  them  that  the  differences  between  Protestants, 
who  all  take  the  Bible  for  their  rule  of  faith,  are  ifm* mfw/im/.     !•  the 


S01EA.H   OATHOLK!   KWJ6I0N.  1^ 

divinity  of.Christ  an  important  or  an  unimportant  article  1  One  claM 
of  Bible-reading  Protestants  admit  the  doctrine;  another  reject  it  wUli 
horror:  pretty  unity  this!  The  Episcopalians  believe  in  the  necessity 
«f  submission  to  the  bishoos;  and  eloquently  have  I  heard  the  author- 
ity of  the  church  advocated  by  them.  They  do  not  say  that  the  church 
IS  infallible,  and  in  this  they  are  inconsistent.  But  will  they  allow  that 
the  difference  between  them  and  Presbyterians  is  unimportant  ?  Is  the 
doctrine  of  a  hell,  with  endless  torments  there  for  the  wicked,  unim- 
poitantl  One  class  of  Bible-readers  hold  this  also,  and  another  class 
leject  it!  Alas !  for  the  declaration  of  my  friend,  that  he  can  prove 
whatever  he  states  to  be  a  fact.  I  strongly  suspect  a  man  who  makm 
such  asseverations. 

He  is  loud  in  his  panegyrics  on  the  unity  of  Protestants  in  essential 
■cts  of  worship:  they  pray  together,  &c.  If  this  were  even  so,  of 
what  avail  is  it,  when  they  differ  in  essential  doctrines.  But,  is  not  my 
friend  aware,  that  this  is  by  no  means  a  fact  1  And  what  reliance  can 
we  place  on  his  statements  of  what  occurred  centuries  ago,  when  here, 
at  home,  and  refutation  nigh  at  hand,  he  makes  such  curious  assertions  ! 

Did  not  a  case  occur,  last  summer,  within  sixty  miles  of  Cincinnati, 
at  Dayton,  when  the  Episcopalian  minister,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Allen,  for- 
bade the  Rev.  Mr.  Peahody,  a  Unitarian  clergj^man,  of  irreproachable 
morals  and  great  amiableness  of  disposition,  to  preach  in  his  church  ! 
Did  not  the  bishop  reprimand  the  vestry,  and  Episcopalian  minister, 
for  having  previously  allowed  him  to  preach  there!  I  think  the 
Episcopalian  bishop  acted,  in  this  respect,  as  he  should  have  done.  I 
blame  none  of  the  parties  concerned,  but  I  state  an  incontrovertible 
fact.  Again,  at  Pottsville,  Pennsylvania,  another  case  occurred.  A 
Unitarian  minister  died  there,  and  the  Episcopal  clergyman  refused  to 
say  prayers  at  his  funeral,  because  of  his  religious  belief.  What, 
then,  becomes  of  my  friend's  vague  and  general  assertion,  abont  unity 
among  Protestants  in  essential  acts  of  worship  1  Will  he,  then,  ex- 
communicate the  Unitarian  I  and,  if  he  once  begin,  how  many  more 
sects  must  be  put  out  of  the  pale  \ 

Let  him  shew  me  that  a  Jesuit  or  a  Dominican,  a  Franciscan,  or  a 
Benedictine,  or  an  Augustinian  ever  refused  to  let  a  member  of  either 
of  these  orders  preach  in  his  church,  or  to  say  prayere  over  a  corpse 
because  of  the  difference  of  orderel  Such  a  thing  has  never  been  heard 
of;  so  that  we  have  unity,  and  Protestants  have  none,  neither  in  doc- 
trine, nor  in  worship;  neither  in  essentials  nor  in  non-essentials,  them- 
selves being  judges.  ^    *  «    ,    ,. 

If  my  hearers  wish  for  a  practical  and  convincing  proof  of  Catholic 
uniformity  of  faith,  thev  have  only  to  enquire  of  the  emigrants  from 
the  various  countries  of  Europe,  who  have  fled  from  the  oppression  of 
their  rulers  st  home,  to  find  free  and  happy  homes  amongst  us  here, 
and  I  promise  them  that  however  awkward  their  appearance,  however 
broken  their  language,  or  uncouth  their  apparel,  they  will  all  answsr 
the  same  on  doctrinal  points.  America,  Asia,  Europe,  Africa,  New 
Holland,  our  faith  Is  every  where  the  same,  like  our  God  and  our 
church.  Who  can  make  void  the  prayer  of  Christ  for  unity  !  Who 
can  disturb  the  church's  union  t  As  well  might  he  pretend  to  make 
the  harmony  of  heaven  to  sleep.  Is  this  union  exemplified  among 
Protestants  f  The  very  contrary  Is  true.  And  whyt  Because  the 
apple  of  discord  is  flung  among  them.  The  seedsof  disorganisation  aad 


DEBARS  oif  mv 


i 


iwii  w^  tiiliikly  sown  in  Protefltantism  from  the  Mrtk  Seet»  nraltipl v 
wiliNNit  •iMl--4iMir  lame  it  Legion.    My  friend  wnt  quite  witty,  about 
III*  lift  fmimmB  foliot  which,  iccording  to  him,  a  Catholic  moat 
fetd  to  imierstand  the  doetrinea  of  his  chnrch.    But  doea  he  not  p«r- 
etite  that  a  Proteetant  ia  infinitely  worae  oflfl    For  he  mast  read  fan* 
fiia|ea  In  which  the  fathers  of  the  church  have  not  written — Hehrew, 
Synae,  Arabic;  aa  well  as  those  in  which  the  fathera  did  write,  Greek, 
l^tln,  lee.  before  he  can  form  a  prudent  judgment  that  he  has  aeqnired 
the  ekmentartf  knowledie  necessary  to  understand  his  rule  tf  faith. 
Me  Biiiat  read  folios  of  commentitora  and  learned  dissertations  oa 
•ontroTened  texts.    He  mnat  decide  for  hiraaelf  what  books  of  acrip- 
tin  are  genuine  and  what  apocrypha],  or  spurious.    For  this  pnrpoev 
h9  iBuat  tipiofe  the  aichives  of  the  ancient  churches,  all  the  dusty 
tiBM  and  ponderous  folios  of  the  ecclesiastical  writers,  to  ascertain 
what  books  were  lefarded  in  their  times  aa  canonical,  and  what  as  un- 
eanonieal.    And  when  he  has,  if  ever,  accomplished  this  herculean 
task,  he  will  be  no  better  off  than  when  he  began,  for  he  can  never  re- 
ly on  the  testimony  of  tho^  fathers,  whom  he  considera  just  as  liable 
to  have  been  mistaken  as  himself!    Thus  he  can  never  be  sure  that  ho 
Msesses  dijective  truth,  or  the  revealed  will  of  God :  he  can  never 
be  sure  that  he  possesses  subjective  truth,  that  is,  that  he  has  a  perfect 
IniPwiMlp  of  what  that  will  is.    Thus  he  can  never  be  sore  that  his 
flit  nf  faith  is  Inspired,  authoritative,  perfect.    I  call  on  my  karttea 
frimi  lo  jmwe  ike  mtOtmj  if  tkit  argumeni,  if  he  can.    And  if  he  can- 
mol,Ih«¥ii  clearly ettiblished  the  contrary  of  his  proposition,  viz: 
•latl*POlestanis  are  not  uniform  in  their  faith,  neither  can  they  be.  Now 
inaik  the  difference  on  the  Catholic  side  of  the  argument.     We  go  for 
the  JMIIf  Mil  IraA'ii'iM— the  whole  word  of  God,  written  and  nnwrit^ 
ten.    Wt  tiko  the  Bible  and  the  church ;  Uie  Bible  and  the  testimony. 
This  nniero  for  us  assurance  doubly  sure.    We  beliere  that  Christ 
•stayithed  a  church  on  earth  which  he  made  the  guardian  of  the  divine 
it|N!aite.  From  that  church,  that  divinely  appointed  guardian  we  receive 
the  heavenly  gift.    She  vouches  for  its  accuracy,  and  on  her  testimony 
we  reeelTe  the  Bible,  as  an  inspired,  authoritatife,  perpetual.  Catholic, 
perfect,  and,  tiplained  by  her,  intelligible  volume.    But  as  we  know 
on  the  anthonty  of  St.  John  xviii.  31, 25,  that  the  world  itself  could  not, 
as  he  thought,  contain  all  that  Christ  spoke,  and  he  always  spoka 
to  instnet  or  edifv— as  we  know  that  Peter  ••  with  many  other  wortk^ 
Ml  recorded  in  the  Acts  of  the  A:|N»lles,  convinced  the  Jews  that 
Jesia  was  the  Messiah— as  wo  know  moreover  that  St.  Paul  conf 
nanded  the  Theaaalonians,  2d.  Ep.,  9d.  ch.,  14.  ▼.  to  hold  the  im- 
AlMfit  whkh  they  had  learned,  whether  %  the  word,  or  his  episaes 
iii  OTiiied  Timothy  to  hold  the  form  of  sound  words  which  be  had 
Mid  firom  him,  in  faith ;  we  therefore  place  the  word  of  God,  so  eoi^ 
wyed  to  ns,  by  the  side  of  Scripture,  and  in  this,  as  1  have  Jost  shews, 
^e  Scripture  itself  is  our  guide.    Our  traditions  do  not,  like  those  sf 
the  Pharisees  whom  Christ  reproached,  make  the  Scripture  void.    Wf 
helitft  Mthing  contrary  to  the  Bibl&— nothing  that  the  Bible  does  not 
clearly  apprOfve.    The  same  God  that  rcTealcd  the  Bible,  established 
the  church.   They  do  not  contradict,  they  mutually  sustain  each  other. 
I  did  not  say  that  the  pope  is  inspired,  that  the  council  is  inspired,  or 
that  the  church  Is  inspired;  bnt  1  do  say  that  the  church,  whether  as> 
— ""^  in  a  fBoofil  council,  or  diffused  throughoat  the  world,  is  as 


BOMAH  CATBOUC   MKLIOION.  189 

certainly  assisted  hy  the  Holy  Ghost  to  teach  all  truth,  as  the  ev«D» 
gelists  and  other  writers  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  were  inspired  by  the 
•aaw  divine  Spirit  to  wbitc  the  speeiai  truthi  which  they  were  commio' 
momi  to  reeeo/ to  particular  churches,  and  on  particular  occasions.  A 
Catholic  is  under  no  necessity  of  knowing  every  thing  that  has  been 
ever  said  or  done  by  the  doctors  and  fathers  of  the  church,  before  he 
can  understand  what  are  the  articles  of  bis  faith.  He  knows  that,  in 
regard  to  doctrine  they  unanimously  agree  in  receiving  the  Apostles' 
creed.  Hence  he  is  sore  that,  **  1  believe  in  God,  the  Father  Almighty, 
Creator  of  Heaven  and  Earth*'  is  an  article  of  faith  which  none  of  these 
Others  contradict,  and  he  has  the  same  absolute  certainty  with  regard 
to  all  the  remaining  articles,  viz :  I  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  in  the 
Holy  Ghost,  the  holy  Catholic  church,  the  communion  of  saints,  the 
forgiveness  of  sins.  So  far  for  the  doctrine ;  besides  which  articles 
he  IS  in  the  habitual  state  of  mind  to  believe  implicitly  whatever  God 
has  revealed  and  proposed  by  his  church.  Then  for  the  natural  and 
moral  law  he  has  an  equally  comprehensive  epitome,  vii :  the  Ten 
commandments  of  God  ;  with  respect  to  which  he  knows  that  there 
has  never  been  the  slightest  difference  of  opinion. 

Neither  the  pope,  nor  a  general  council,  nor  the  whole  church  has 
now,  or  OTcr  had,  the  power  to  change,  or  suppress  an  article  of  the 
creed,  or  a  precept  of  the  decalogue.  Is  there  any  thing  vague  in 
this!  any  thing  indistinct!  anything  unscriptural  or  anliscriptural ! 

My  friend  does  not  hear,  or  correctly  state  what  I  say.  I  did  not 
say  that  the  body  ruled  the  head.  It  would  be  a  contradiction  in  terms ; 
because  the  body  supposes  a  head  and  a  heart,  which  eyery  body 
ought  to  have,  'fhere  must  be  no  schism  in  the  body.  He  has  made 
some  yery  eloquent  observations  on  the  impossibility  of  determining 
where  the  infallibility  resides,  whether  in  the  head  or  in  the  body  or 
both  &c.  in  the  pope,  or  in  a  general  council,  and  argues  that  we  may 
thereibre  as  well  have  none  at  all.  Now,  let  me  illustrate  this  point. 
Has  not  my  friend  a  mind  and  one  too  highly  endowed  by  nature  1 
Well,  does  he  know  where  it  resides!  Is  it  in  his  head;  or  in  his 
heart,  or  in  his  stomach  I  (a  laugh)  Does  he  know  where  to  put  his 
hand  upon  it!  There  are  yarious  theories  upon  this  subject  among 
scientific  men.  But  who  denies  that  he  has  a  mind  !  I  repeat,  who 
denies  the  existence  of  mind  !  Does  it  affect  this  belief  to  say  that 
we  cannot  tell  whether  it  is  here  or  there — in  the  body  or  around  it !  So 
it  is  with  the  heavenly  mind  that  guides  the  church.  Even  if  we  did 
not  know  its  exact  place  of  residence,  we  could  easily  judge  of  its 
influence  and  guidance  by  its  effects.  But  we  do  know  where  it  evin- 
ces its  presence,  as  I  have  more  than  once  explained  to  the  gentleman. 

What  has  Adrian's  opinion  to  do  with  the  question!  It  was  but  his 
personal,  private  opinion,  and  no  article  of  faith.  Whether  this  opi- 
nion was  right,  or  wrong,  all  I  said  stands  good.  The  witty  conceit 
of  my  friend  was  a  sophistry  suggested  by  the  pa^n  oracles,  who 
eoiild  respond  in  such  ambiguous  tenns,  that  it  mignt  be  interpreted 
in  fayor  of  the  oracle's  foreknowledge  according  to  the  event ;  for 
instance  a  king  going  out  to  battle  would  be  told,  "  You  will  destroy  a 
great  city ;"  but  whether  it  was  his  own,  or  his  enemies',  depended  on 
tlie  issue.    The  idea  is  borrowed  from  Pagan  craft. 

[I  am  now  admonished  to  dilate  a  little  longer  on  the  decision  of 
the  council  of  Constance  with  regard  to  the  *  Cfup.'  1  have  frequently. 


I< 


!•  iny  iilefecMiise  with  parsoiia  nol  Catlioiie,  heard  this  difficnity  pT<^ 

ri ;  md  I  am  fiid  of  th«  ofyportonilf f  mme  fi»r  allt  of  explainiof 
Why  does  tlw  Roman  Catholio  church  withhold  tho  eiip  froa 
the  laity  f  In  the  early  ages*  the  holy  eaehariat  was  comnmiiicated  to 
the  fiutnful  under  either  species  |  oHen  under  both.  When  the  eucha« 
fist  was  carried,  as  it  was  the  pttdice  of  primitive  chrislians  to  carry 
it  with  them  in  all  their  sojournings,  by  sea  and  land,  as  wine  was  ex- 
poaed  to  sour  in  tropical  climes,  tliey  consequently  carried,  on  theii 
traTels,  only  the  species  of  Bread.  Did  they  believe  that  die  virtue 
of  tht  mwhaiial  was  thus  destroyed  I  No.  'Fhey  knew  with  St.  Paul 
that  Jesus  Christ,  rising  from  the  dead,  dieth  no  mora.  Death  shall 
10  longer  have  dominion  over  him.  They  knew  therefore  that  his 
iish  was  living  flesh,  not  dead  and  bloodless ;  and  that,  consequent* 
ly,  in  the  eucharist,  under  either  species  the  flesh  and  blood  are  in- 
itpaiably  united. 

What  was  the  roaton  of  the  abolition  of  the  practice  T  When  the 
deaeiMi  diatributed  the  consecrated  elements  to  the  faithful,  there 
were  aiany  infirm,  decrepit,  and  palsied  communicants,  from  whoee 
trMUhling  hands,  or  lips,  it  was  feared,  as  it  had  frequently  occurred, 
the  cup  might  fall,  and  thus  might  the  holy  elements  be  trodden  under 
foot  and  profaned.  A  contrary  usage  was  therefore  instituted,  and  it 
has  alnce  prevailed.  The  dislike,  indeed  ditwust,  which  many  persons 
fM  for  wine,  the  un%villingness  to  drink  from  a  chalice  which  had 
Mated  from  mouth  to  mouth,  he,  Im;.  are  causes  which,  in  all  pro- 
Dahllity,  prevent  a  change  in  the  present  disciplinary  regulation,  bill 
the  church  could  to  morrow  reestablish  the  abolished  practice  of  giv- 
ing the  cup  to  the  laior,  if  she  please.  She  did  so,  since  the  rro> 
lestant  reformation,  in  favor  of  the  Bohemians. 

The  subject  of  oalhs  and  perjuries  was  quoted.  Any  man  in  hia 
■ilier  aenaes  must  discern  that  my  friend  has  mistaken  the  meaninff 
of  the  pope.  Examine  the  circumstances.  He  supposes  the  truth 
th.t  the  chureh  neiAer  can  nor  does  require  any  thine  contrary  to 
itrnUm  and  judgment,  and  truth,  which,  in  all  her  standards,  and  in  all 
mm  catechisms,  she  teaches  as  the  essential  conditions,  for  every  law- 
fnl  oath.  Again,  she  every  where  teaches^  with  St.  Paul,  that  an  oathi 
coratrary  to  conscience,  is  a  sin. 

The  pope  knew  that  the  church  could  not— that  God  himself,  who 
founded  her  as  the  pillar  and  gronnd  of  the  truth,  could  not  be  pleas- 
ed with  sin,  or  served  by  a  lie.  Let  me  illustrate  this  matter  and 
set  it  at  r«8t  for  ever.  An  infidel,  swears  that  he  will  write  against 
the  utility  of  the  bible,  deny  its  apthenticity,  undermine  its  evidences, 
east  it  into  the  flames.  Is  his  owi  an  act  of  religion  I  Is  it  not  rather 
a  peijury  I  Again— a  man  swi^aQji  to  take  away  the  life  of  another 
man,  justly  or  unjustly,  he  boots  not.  Is  not  his  oath  a  perjury, 
lather  than  an  oath,  since  it  is  maninttly  against  the  uiiliiy  of  socie- 
lY  and,  eottisouently,  against  the  order  of  God  I  It  ia  remarkable  trjM 
tlia  pope  sp3dikii  too  of  an  oath  against  the  ieaeking  tf  ike  faiken^ 
"eonlfiainstituta  patrum,"  than  whose  sermons  against  all  grievous 
Crimea,  and  in  an  especial  manner,  against  peijury,  nothing  can  ha 
conceived  more  denunciatory,  more  truly  terrific.  Is  it  fair— 4s  it,  lo- 
gical, to  draw  from  the  premises  a  voncfusion  so  vituperative  t 

To  force  a  shadow  of  unifonnitv,  the  thirty-nine  articles  were  drawn 
up  by  the  church  of  England,  aod  the  clergy  of  that  church,  by  a  cruel 
tyranny  over  conscience,  compelled  to  swear  to  them.   Many  eminent 


BOMAH  OATBOUG  SXLI6I0X. 


lU 


divines  of  thai  church  have  taught  that  the  articles  are  not  to  Ip 
Bworn  to  with  unqualified  assent,  but  that  the  mental  reservation, «  aa 
I  understand  them,"  is  allowed;  while  the  sovereign  lord,  or  lordess, 
of  church  and  state,  and  many  no  less  eminent  divines,  have  insistea 
that  the  articles  must  be  sworn  to  with  the  most  entire  and  unquahfi- 
ed  submission.  Is  this,  in  my  friend's  estimation,  the  reverence  due 
to  the  solemnity  of  an  oath!  or  is  it  not  taking  the  holy  name  in 
vain!  Catholic  priests  in  this  country  take  no  oath.  I  took  none 
The  first  oath  I  took  was  one  of  allegiance  to  the  United  States,  ah 
iurinff  all  foreign  potentates,  &c.,  as  the  oath  is  couched,  rhis  oal^ 
1  took  in  the  hands  of  Judges  John  and  Thomas  Buchanan,  in  FreA» 
erick,  Maryland.  I  also  took  an  oath,  several  years  afterwards,  when 
consecrated  a  bishop,  to  testify  my  belief  in  and  faithful  adherence  to 
ihe  doctrines  of  my  church.  This  was  a  further  confirmauon  of  tho 
oath  which  I  had  previously  taken.    This  is  no  immorality. 

We  are  again  referred  to  a  change  in  the  ^doctrine'*  of  the  church. 
•»The  second  council  of  the  Lateran,"  so  says  Mr.  C.  ''forbade  mt 
marriage  of  the  clergy^  whereas  nothing  was  more  common  m  the  Jirai 
eight  centuries  than  for  priests  to  marry J*^  Now,  in  the  first  place, 
celibacy  is  no  part  of  Catholic  doctrine,  at  all.  It  is  not  an  article 
of  faith.  The  pope  could,  to-morrow,  change  that  law,  and  allow 
the  Roman  Catholic  clergy,  as  the  Greek  priests  do,  to  marry.  It  is 
one  of  the  bright  features  of  our  ministry,  that  the  time  and  means. 


I' 


18  a  ffooa,  wise,  ana  nooie  iumhuhuu.  x.ii.*^««^  »••«  — — r-j '  "  ~  , 
command  of  God.  But  we  hold  that  it  is  more  perfect,  or  as  St.  Paul 
says,  "  IT  IS  GOOD  "  for  the  "  Priests  of  the  Lamb  "  to  abstain.  God, 
for  whose  sake  they  make  the  sacrifice,  will  sustain  them  through  temp- 
tation. Keep  thyself  chaste,  says  St.  Paul  to  Timothy,  1st  Ep.  ch. 
▼.  21.  Again,  St.  John  says:  "And  I  heard  a  voice  from  heaven,  aa 
the  voice  of  harpers  harping  on  their  harps,  and  they  sung  as  it  were 
a  new  canticle,  before  the  throne,  and  before  the  four  living  creatures 
and  the  ancients ;  and  no  man  could  say  the  canticle,  but  those  hun- 
dred and  forty-four  thousand,  who  were  purchased  from  the  earth. 
These  are  they  who  were  not  defiled  with  women:  for  they  are  vir- 
gins. These  follow  the  Lamb  whithersoever  he  goeth.  These  were 
purchased  from  among  men,  the  first-fruits  to  God  and  to  t,he  Lamb : 
and  in  their  moulh  there  was  found  no  lie;  for  they  are  without  spot 
before  the  throne  of  God."  What  does  all  this  mean  !  Is  it  not  evi- 
dently  the  highest  eulogy  that  could  be  pronounced  on  the  state  to 
which  their  holy  functions,  as  priests  of  the  spotless  Victim  of 
our  altars,  daily  summon  the  clergy  of  our  church  !  I  glory  m  this 
feature  of  our  discipline.    Death  before  dishonor  to  a  virginal  pneat. 

hood  •  It.* 

In  the  second  place  it  is  a  wide  mistake,  to  say  that  nothing  n'aa 
more  common,  for  the  first  six  hundred  years,  than  for  pnests  to  mar. 
If.  The  general  council  of  Nice  enforced,  by  a  special  enactment, 
the  celibacy  of  the  clergy.  This  was  the  first  general  council  of  the 
Catholic  church;  and  the  practice,  it  enforced,  was  no  innovation. 
Tlie  councils  of  Neo  Caesarea  and  Ancyra  had,  several  yeare  previ- 
ously, made  laws  to  tliis  effect  for  priests  and  deacons.  How  waa 
the  circumstance  introduced  into  the  council  of  Nice  !  Several  bish- 
ops, priests  and  deacons,  had  been  married  before  their  ordination.  It 


•  .  • ' 


I 


Wti  proposed  to  compel  those  who  hmd  not  ▼olonlarily  returned  to 
Kfigleness  of  life,  to  separate  from  their  wires.  Paphnurius,  an  un- 
mnied  bishop,  in  conseqaence  oftheabaseof  the  Manichcans,  wlio 
coisidered  marriage  as  coming  from  the  evil  principle,  dissuaded  the 
cmmeil  ftmn  this  oonr^,  and  so  the  bishops  agreed,  for  all  past  mar- 
liages.  So  wncrallj,  however,  was  the  celibacy  of  the  Greek  clergy 
Hen  established,  that  even  Protestant  historians — Mosheim,  Ist  toL 
p.  GSf— -complain  of  the  melancholy,  morose  and  unsocial  institution, 
in  the  second  century.  "  The  sensual  man,"  says  St.  Paul,  *•  per- 
ceiveth  not  the  thinjrs  that  are  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  for  it  is  foolhhntaa 
Id  Agm.**  Ist  Cor.  ii.  14.  But  of  the  many  curious  things  which  my 
ftimd  has  said,  most  unwittingly,  in  my  &Tor,  in  the  course  of  thii 
debate,  the  most  curious  of  all  is  that  he  should  have,  himself,  in- 
formed us,  that  for  the  first  six  hundred  years,  one  half  the  canoni! 
were  occupied  w  ith  the  regulation  of  the  clergy  as  to  this  affair  of 
eslibicy !!  And  why,  if  the  clergy  were  allowed  to  marry!  Is  not 
this,  iidependently  of  the  acts  of  these  councils,  which  hare  reached 
US,  irresistible  proof  of  the  care  taken  to  obtain  an  unmarried,  a  pux« 
clergy  !    This  is  not  immorality. 

Confession  Is  not  an  immoral  doctrine.  It  is  a  holy  institution. 
This  I  shall  prove  in  due  course  of  time.  I  agree  with  the  Tenerable 
liithop  T«¥cni,  the  leaned  author  of  the  "Amicable  Discussion,"  and 
«f  the  '•Answer  to  Faber's  Bifficulties  of  Romanism."  Let  my  friend 
hut  study  these  pages  with  sincerity,  and  he,  too,  will  become  a  Catho- 
lic. How  differeni  the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  bishop  of  Strasburgh, 
and  of  the  Protestant  bishop  Onderdonk,  of  Philadelphia.  The  for- 
mer  shews  cleariy  how  the  most  humble  Catholic  can  have  a  divine 
assurance  for  the  truth  of  his  religion;  the  latter,  as  I  have  myself 
heard  him  declare,  in  St. James' church,  Philadelphia,  in  the  year  1832, 
(amd  his  pastoral  charse  has  been  since  published,  and  it  will  prove 
what  I  here  say,)  teaches  that  not  even  the  most  learned  Protestant 
can  ever  be  positively  sure  that  either  himself  or  his  church  is  right! 
And  yet,  St.  Paul  says,  without  faith  it  is  impossible  to  please  God.  By 
faith,  he  of  course  means  true  faith— and  yet  the  Protestant  bishop  says 
we  never  can  be  sure  that  we  have  that  faith  !  What  becomes  now  of 
the  Protestant  iiifallibllity,  for  which  my  friend  so  strenuously  argued 
to-day  1  The  bishop's  conclusion,  on  Protestant  grounds,  is  more  rea- 
HMMiA/e  than  Mr.  C.'s.  As  long  as  two  pious  and  able  men,  of  different 
denominations,  after  all  their  efforts  at  truth,  come  to  different  and  op- 
|M»ite  cMclusions  uoon  essential  matiere,  how  can  either  say  *»i  am 
rifht,**  and  "  my  neighbor  is  wrong?"  What,  I  am  asked,  is  the  course 
I  would  pursue  with  one  who  is  not  yet  a  christian,  but  anxious  to  be 
instructed  in  the  evidences  of  Christianity  !     Why,  the  course  1  would 

Cursuc  is  this :  I  would  addreas  Mi  remon  alone,  as  long  as  he  has  no 
elter  guide— convince  him  that  the  bible  is,  at  least,  authentic  his- 
toiy— and  that  he  can  rely  upon  the  truth  of  the  facte  recorded  in  it, 
■■  he  would  on  human  testimony.  I  would  introduce  him  to  Jssua 
Christ,  whose  character  is  there  portrayed,  whose  miracles  are  there 
Itemrded.  I  would  tell  him  why  he  came  on  earth ;  how  he  founded  a 
church  to  explain  whatever  was  difficult  in  the  bible,  after  having  col- 
lected all  its  books  together,  what  no  man  could  do  for  himself;  how 
Mestabllthed  that  church  as  the  pillar  and  ground  of -the  truth,  and 
•sidof  its  fmtam,  "He  that  heareth  you,  heareth  mo;"  and  when  I 


BOMAIV    CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


193 


had  convinced  him  of  the  authority  of  the  church,  I  would  not  require 
af  him  to  abjure  reason,  but  I  would  consign  him  to  a  higher  and  safer 
guide,  that  church,  herself  the  immaculate  bride  of  Christ. 

Now  my  friend's  allusion  to  the  Jew,  brings  a^story  to  my  mind, 
and  I  cannot  answer  his  queries  better  than  by  relating  it.  A  Protes- 
tant and  a  Catholic  clergyman  walking  together,  met  a  Jewish  Rabbi, 
"Well,  Solomon,"  says  the  Protestant  minister,  "here  we  three  are 
met,  and  all  of  different  religions,  which  of  us  is  right?"  »*ril  tell 
thee,"  says  the  Israelite,  "  If  the  Messiah  has  not  come,  I  am  right; 
if  he  has  eome,  the  Catholic  is  right;  but  whether  he  has  come  or  noL 
ytw  are  wrong."    (A  laugh.)— [Time  expires.] 

Ha^patt  11  o'clock,  A,  M 
Mr  Campbell  risei— 

1  dhall  respond  to  such  matters  as  have  a  bearing  on  the  question,  ai 
soon  as  I  have  finished  my  exposition  of  the  immoral  tendency  of  tlie 
K'omish  rule  of  faith. 

That  common  cursing  or  damning,  which  offends  our  ears  in  all 
the  lanes  and  streete  and  highways,  is  authorized  in  the  following 
words : 

**To  carse  insensible  creatures,  such  as  the  wind,  the  rain,  the  years,  the  dayi 
fire,  &c.,  is  no  blasphemy,  unless  the  one  who  curses,  expressly  connects  then* 
in  relation  to  God,  by  saying,  for  instance,  cursed  be  the  fire  of  God,  the  brettd 
of  God,y  &c.     Ufror.  Prax.  Coof.  N.  30.  . 

Again :  the  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  faith  sanctions  a  violation  of  the 
third  commandment. 

; ;; ^**To  curse  the  living  is  a  mortal  s:o,  when  it  is 

formal;  that  it,  (as  Caietan  explains  it,)  when  he  who  curses  intends  and  wishes 
a  grievous  evil  to  befall  the  one  be  curses:  but  it  is  no  mortal  sin  to  curse  the 
living,  when  the  curse  pronounced  is  merely  material;  that  is,  when  it  is  pro- 
noun<:ed  without  any  evil  intention.  And  why  is  it  not  a  mortal  sin? — because 
be  who  curses  a  living;  man  does  not  always  intend  to  curse  the  soul,  or  to  de- 
spise its  substance,  in  which,  in  an  especial  manner,  the  imag^e  of  God  shines 
forth,  but  he  curses  the  man  without  considering,  or  reflecting,  about  bis  soul, 
and  therefore,  in  cursing  him  he  does  not  commit  a  grievous  sin."     Id.  ib.  29. 

License  is  given  to  violate,  in  some  way  or  other,  every  precept  of 
the  Decalogue.    The  Sabbath  as  a  divine  institution  is  thus  set  aside: 

"As  to  the  obligation  of  hearing 

the  Holy  TmNG,"  (which  is  the  popish  epithet  for  attending  mass,)  "  let  the 
penitent  be  questioned  in  regard  to  whether  he  has  omitted  that  HoLY  THING?" 
(to  attend  mass.)  *•  As  to  senile  works,  let  him  be  asked  huw  long  he  has 
worked?  and  what  kind  of  work  he  did?  for,  according  to  the  doctors  generally, 
those  who  work  two  hours  are  excused  from  grievous  sin;  nay,  other  doctors 
allow  more,  especially  if  the  labor  be  light,  or  if  there  be  some  more  notable 
reason.  Let  him  also  be  asked,  why  he  labored;  whether  it  was  the  custom  ot 
the  place,  or  whether  it  was  from  necessity?  Because  poverty  can  excuse  from 
iin  in  working  on  the  Sabbath ;  as  the  poor  are  generally  excused,  who,  if  they 
do  not  labor  on  the  Sabbath,  cannot  support  themselves  or  tlieir  ftuuilies;  as  they 
also  are  excused  who  sew  upon  the  Sabbath,  because  they  cannot  do  it  on  other 
dtt>s."     Id.  ib.  N.  32,  33.    [Synopsis,  pp.  52.  53. 

**  Merchandising,  aud  the  selling  of  goods  at  auction  on  the  Sundays,  is,  on  ac- 
count of  its  being  the  general  custom,  altogether  lawful."  "  Buying  and  selling 
p)ods  on  the  Lord's  day  and  on  festival  days,  are  certainly  forbidden  by  the  canon- 
ical law — but  where  the  contrary  custom  prevails,  it  is  excusable."  Id.  ib.  N.  293. 
[Synopsis,  p.  192. 

—  ■    ■  '  '  ■     **  He  who  performs  any  servile 

work  on  the  Lord^s  day,  or  on  a  festival  day,  let  him  do  penance  three  days  on 
bread  and  water.  If  any  one  break  the  fasts  prescribed  oy  the  church,  let  hira 
do  penance  on  bread  ana  water  twenty  days." — [Synopsis,  p.  115. 

R  13 


I 


^ 


IM 


OMBATM  m  THB 


•*  Th§pt^  has  thi  rifcht  and  Hm^fmmr  to  decree,  thai  the  sameHfieation  o/tM 
LoRO*s  DAf ,  shuU  Ofi(y  emlinue  mjho  hotirg,  and  that  serviU  workt  may  U 
iam  on  tmat  Dlf.**     Iil.  ib.    [Sjnopsii,  p.  188. 

Custom,  indeed,  is  fast  becoi]iiii|,  as  St.  Li^rori  teaches,  an  excuse 
for  any  thing,  'llie  traditions  of  fathers,  the  xanons  of  councils,  the 
deeiwt  of  popes — ^all  wear  away  by  the  attrition  of  custom.  Hence,  in 
a  Eoman  Cainolic  population,  pure  and  unmixed,  there  is  a  degree  of 
frosiiiess  of  immorality,  that  Romanists  themselves  could  not  endure 
in  Protestant  countries.  Even  the  morals  of  New  Orleans  could  not 
he  endured  in  Cincinnati.  There,  it  is  custom  to  go  to  mass  in  tlie 
morning,  to  ra  ister  at  noon,  and  to  go  to  the  theatre  in  the  evening  on 
the  Lord's  day.  This  is  indeed,  the  custom,  or  something  very  like 
it,  in  all  Roman  Catholic  countries. 

On  stealing,  in  general  the  casuist  directs  as  follows : 

— _ '•  111  respect  to  the  tif vtiitb  cuiiuiiuiiiiuieiit,*'  says  the  Mint, 

•'let  the  confrasor  mk  the  penitent  if  he  hug  stolen  any  thing?  and  from  whom. 
wkethcr  ilwiiifroni  oneperaon,  or  froiinlifteretit  personal  whether  he  was  alone, 
or  with  others,  and  whether  it  was  once  or  oftener  ?  Because,  if  at  each  time 
he  stole  a  considerable  amount,  at  each  time  he  sinned  mortally.  But  on  the 
eoiitraiy,if  at  each  time  he  stole  a  small  amount,  then  be  did  not  sin  grievously, 
unlett  tne  articles  stolen  came  to  a  considerable  aniouni ;  provided,  however,  that 
in  the  beginning,  he  had  not  the  intention  of  »traling  to  a  large  amount;  but 
when  the  amount  Elreatly  stolen  has  become  considerable,  although  he  did  not 
•in  rrievouslv,  yet  be  is  bound  under  a  grievons  sin,  to  restitution;  at  least, as  to 
Ihelast  portions  that  he  stole  by  which  the  amount  became  considerable.  It  is 
to  be  observed.  Iiowever,  that  a  larger  sum  is  required  to  constitute  a  heavj- 
amount  in  small  thefta,  and  more  is  required  if  the  things  are  stolen  from  difler- 
tnt  persons, than  if  they  were  stolen  trom  the  same  person;  hence,  it  is  said,  that 
II  •mall  thefts,  which  are  made  atditt'erent  times,  double  the  sum  is  required  to 
COMtitate  what  is  to  be  considered  a  large  amount.  And  if  a  considerable  time 
intert cue  between  the  thefts,  for  instance,  two  months  then  the  theft  probably 
does  not  amount  ti  a  grievous  sin."     I  J.  ib.  H.  42. 

On  stealing  to  pay  masses : 

—— -—-^-— —-———-— ---^—-----—  "  If  the  person  is  unknown,"  continues  the 
•aint,  '*  from  whom  another  has  stolen,  the  penitent  is  obliged  to  restitution. 
•ither  by  having  masses  said,  or  by  bestowing  alms  on  the  poor,  or  by  uiakiug 
peaeats  for  pious  places,*'  by  which  the  saint  means  churches,  nunneries,  &c.; 
**and  if  th«  penon  himself  is  poor,  he  can  retain  the  amount  stolen  for  the  use 
of  his  family:  But  if  the  person  on  whom  the  theft  has  been  couimitted,  is 
known,  to  him  the  restitution  is  to  be  made;  wherefore,  it  is  wonderful,  indeed, 
that  there  are  to  be  fdund  so  many  confessors  so  ignorant,  that,  although  they 
Inow  who  the  creditor  is,  enjoin  upon  the  penitent,  that,  of  the  stolen  goods, 
which  they  ou§ht  to  restore,  thev  bestow  alms,  or  have  masses  said.  It  is  to  be 
observed,  that  if  any  one  takes  the  property  of  another,  or  retains  it,  under  the 

E resumption,  that  if'^he  were  to  ask  it  of  the  owner,  he  would  willingly  give  it  to 
iiil«he  ought  not  to  be  obliged  to  make  restitution.*'    Id.  ib.  N.  44. 
Thus  we  see  theft  can  be  made  available  to  the  behoof  of  priesli  in 
saying  masses— what  they  ought  to  say,  and  by  the  old  canons,  ar« 
Iwiid  to  say  eraiia* 
On  l^ng.   There  is  a  way  of  making  lying  no  lying : 

**  Relatively  to  the  ninth  commandment,  of  popery  the 

Mgiith,  the  saint  proceeds  aa  follows: — **  In  regard  to  the  reparation  of  the  char- 
acter of  a  person,  if  the  fault  of  which  he  has  been  accused,  is  false,  he  who 
de&mei  him  is  bound  to  retract.     But  if  the  fault  is  true,  the  defamation  that  is 

E  ought  to  be  looked  upon  in  the  most  favorable  light  that  it  can  be  wilhattt 
:  let  the  penitent  say,  for  example,  [by  way  of  excuse,]  "  I  %va8  tieceived, 
sd.**  Others  also  adniit  that  he  can  emtivocate,  by  saying.  /  lied,  since  every 
•in  is  a  lie,  as  the  scripture  says.  Again,  by  an  <>9utvoca/ton,  he  may  say  *  I  only 
made  this  up  in  my  head,'  since  all  words  which  proceed  from  the  iiii:d  mny  bt 
■aid  to  rome  from  the  head ;  since  the  head  is  taken  for  the  mind."  Id  ib.  N  46. 
[SynO'psk,  p.  56. 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    BSU6ION. 


195 


TTie  difference  between  insulting  or  dishonoring  one's  pareLts  and 
a  spihtnal  father,  bishop  or  pastor: 

*•  He  who  curses  his  parents,  let  him  do  penance,  on  bread  and  water,  forty 
days.  He  who  insults  his  parents,  three  years.  If  any  one  rebel  against  his 
bi»hop,  pastor,  aud  father,  let  him  do  penaiice  in  a  monastery,  during  his  whole 
life." — [Synopis.  p.  116. 

Rules  given  to  confessors: 

** The  saint  continues:    "The  confessor 
ought  to  be  extremely  cautious  how  he  hears  the  confession  of  women,  and  ha 
should  particularly  bear  in  mind  what  is  said  in  the  holy  congregation  of  bishops, 
21,  Jan.  1610.    •*  Confessors  should  not,  without  necessity,  hear  the  con/essiont 
of  women  after  dusk,  or  before  ivnlight.'*    In  regard  to  the  prudence  of  a  con- 
fessor, he  ought,  in  general,  rather  to  be  rigid  with  young  women  in  the  confes- 
sional than  bland;  neither  ought  he  to  allow  them  to  come  to  him  before  confes- 
sion to  converse  with  him;  much  less  should  he  allow  them  to  kiss  his  hands.    It 
is  also  imprudent  for  the  confessor  to  let  his  eyes  wander  after  his  female  peni- 
tents, and  to  gaie  upon  them  as  they  are  retiring  from  confession.     The  confes- 
sor should  never  receive  presents  from  his  female  penitents;  and  he  should  be 
particularlv  careful  not  to  visit  them  at  their  houses,  except  in  case  of  severe  ilU 
ness;  nor  snould  he  visit  them  then,  unless  he  be  sent  for.     In  this  case  he  should 
be  very  cautious  in  what  manner  he  hears  their  confessions;  therefore  the  door 
should  be  left  open,  and  he  should  sit  in  a  place  where  he  can  be  seen  by  others, 
and  he  should  never  fix  his  eyes  upon  the  face  of  his  penitent;  especially  if  they 
be  spiritual  persons,  in  regard  to  whom,  the  danger  of  attraction  is  greater.  The 
venerable  father  Sertorius  Capotus  sayB,that  the  devil,  in  order  to  unite  spiritu- 
al persons  together,   always  makes   use  of  the  pretext  of  virtue,  that,  being  mu- 
tually alfected  bv  these  virtues,  the  passion  may  pass  from  their  virtues  over  to 
their  persons.     Hence,  says  St.  Augustin,  according  to  St.  Thonms,  confessors, 
in  hearing  the  confessions  of  spiritual  women,  ought  to'be  brief  and  rigid ;  neither 
are  they  the  less  to  be  guarded  against  on  account  of  their  being  holy;  for  the 
more  holy  they  are,  the  more  they  attract."    And  he  adds,  "that  such  persons 
are  not  aware  that  the  devil  does   not,  at  first,  lance  his  poisoned  arrows,  but 
those  only  which  touch  but  lightly  and  thereby  increase  the  affection.     Hence  it 
happens,  that  such  persons  do  not  conduct  themselves  as  they  did  at  first,  like 
angels,  but  as  if  they  were  clothed  with  flesh.     But,  on  the  contrary,  they  mutu- 
ally eye  one  another,  and  their  minds  are  captivated  with  the  soft  and  tender  ex 
pressions  which  pass  between  them,  aud  which  still  seem  to  them  to  proceed  from 
the  first  fervors  of  their  devotion:  hence  they  soon  begin  to  long  for  each  other's 
company;  and  thta,  be  concludes,  *  the  spiritual  devotion  is  converted  into  car- 
nal.    And,  indeed,  O,  how  many  priests,  who  before  were  innocent,  have,  on  ac- 
count of  these  attractions,  which  began  in  the  spirit,  lost  both  God  and  their 
•oul!*  "    Id.  ib.  N.  119. 

The  saint  proceeds:  "Moreover,  the  confessor  ought  not  to  be  so  fond  of 
hearing^  the  confessions  of  women,  as  to  be  induced  thereby  to  refuse  to  bear  the 
confessions  of  men.  O,  how  wretched  it  is  to  see  so  many  confessors,  who  spend 
the  greater  part  of  the  day  in  hearinr  the  confessions  of  certain  religious  wom- 
en, who  are  called  Bizocas,"  (a  kinu  of  secular  nuns,)  "  and  when  they  after- 
wards see  men  or  married  women  coming  to  confession  to  them,  overwhelmed 
in  the  cares  and  troubles  of  life,  and  who  can  hardly  spare  time  to  leave  their 
homes,  or  business,  how  wretched  it  is  to  see  these  confessors  dismiss  them,  say- 
ing, */  have  something  else  to  attend  to:  go  to  some  other  confessor"  hence  it 
happens,  that,  not  finding  any  other  confessor  to  whom  to  confess,  they  live  du> 
ring  months  and  years  without  the  sacraments,  and  without  God!"  Id.  ib.  N. 
120.     [Synopsis,  p.  78. 

The  Romanist  rule  of  faith  both  in  word  and  deed  places  the  Virgin 
Mary  above  Christ,  in  the  religious  homage  of  the  chu:ch. 

"  Nuns,"  says  the  saint,  "  ought  to 
hare  a  s|)ecial  devotion  towards  St.  Joseph,  towards  tfieir  guardian  angel,  and 
their  tutelary  saint,  and  principally  towards  St.  Michael,  the  universal  patron  of 
all  the  faithful,  but  above  all  towards  the  roost  holy  Virgin  Mary,  who  is  called  by 
the  church  our  life  and  our  hope ;  for  it  is  morally  impossible  for  a  soul  to  advance 
much  in  perfection,  without  a  particular  and  a  certain  tender  devotion  towards 
the  most  holy  mother  of  God.*'     Id.  ib.  N.  171. 


i 


IM 


IMSW.AT'B    OM    TUB 


«i 


It, 

t>"4 
,1 


Our  Ufe  and  our  kope  /**  Ttiese  words  are  io  Protestant  faitb  and 
Dibk  propriety  due  to  the  Lord  alone.— We  cannot  tiave  two  ittw»;  and 
tiro  lioiiea;  and  if  Mary  is  our  life  and  hope,  the  Lord  Jesu;*  is  not 
I  before  alluded  to  this  person  under  the  Roman  name  of  a  being  call 
ed  **  the  mother  of  God  ;'*  which  my  opponent,  as  his  manner  is,  served 
op  rhetorically,  as  if  to  produce  a  sympathy  in  favor  of  the  superstitious 
Yonoimtioo  of  his  party.  He  had  not,  however,  a  Roman  Catholic 
audience.  I  meant  no  disrespect  to  any  person.  1  know  that  the  more 
imielll|pDt Romanists  discard  the  phrase  as  too  gross  and  unauthorized. 
TiiOM  ta  00  being  in  the  universe,  say  they,  who  ought  to  be  called 
lie  mMer  of  Bodi  1  had  in  my  eye  at  the  moment  some  wretched  de* 
signs  in  some  Roman  churches,  a  scandal  to  any  christian  people :  a 
■ort  of  family  group,  in  which  there  is  the  picture  of  a  venerable  old 
man,  said  to  represent  the  Father  of  the  universe-next  an  old  woman, 
the  image  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  between  them  the  picture  of  the 
**ii%  SUdf  Jesus."  It  has  disgusted  the  more  intelligent  Romanists. 
lliit  6liiily  of  divinities  is  much  mor^i  in  the  style  of  the  Pantheon,  or 
the  poetry  of  Hesiod,  than  in  the  spirit,  or  letter,  or  taste  of  Christianity. 
While  on  this  subject  we  shall  hear  the  moral  theology  of  the  church 
on  the  use  of  images;  and,  first,  of  the  use  of  the  virgin  Mary ^s  image 

**  Let  him.  who  is  in  the  hsibit  of  btaspheiiiiii<^,  be  advi^trd  to  make  the  sigu  ol 
th«  crom  [f]  ten  or  fifteen  times  a  day,  upon  the  g^round  with  his  tongue:  and 
thrice  every  morning:,  to  say  to  the  most  blessed  Virgin:  *  O,  my  Lordess!   give 
OM  patience.*  "    Id.  ib.  N.  16.    Synop^iB,  pp.  44,  45. 

**  Patly  to  visit  the  most  holy  sacraiuent,  and  the  imare  of  the  most  holy  Mary, 
to  her  of  them  the  grace  of  pergeverance."     Id.  ib.  NT  14. 

'*0  my  Lordess,  give  me  patience!"  Is  not  this  idolatry  1  To  beg 
of  the  image  of  the  virgin  the  grace  of  perseverance ! ! !  No  wonder 
that  these  mlks  find  it  expedient  to  expunge  the  second  commandment, 
which  savs,  "Thou  shah  not  worship  an  image" — no,  "Thou  shalt 
not  bow  down  to  it."  fiut  we  shall  hear  the  directions  given  concern- 
ing the  divine  mother : 

"  The  saint  now  proceeds  to  give  instruction  to  the  pa- 
nth  priest  bow  to  lead  his  flock  in  the  way  of  **  salvation."  **  Let  hint  be  watch- 
ful,** savi  he,  **  to  render  his  flock  »tu'tioiis  in  their  devotion  towanis  the  Virgin 
Mary,  by  declaring  to  thetn  how  merciful  this  DIVIN£  MOTHER  is  in  succor- 
ing Ihoiie  who  are  dewtut  to  her."  Id.  c.  x.  N.  216.  **  Therefore,"  continues 
the  Mint.  **let  him  intimate  to  them,  that  they  daily  recite,  in  conmion  with  tht  ir 
lamilies,  fiv«  decades  of  the  Rosarv;  that  they  last  upon  Saturday,  and  celebrate 
Movanat  vpon  the  festivals  of  our  fjordess  (nostrae  Domina?.)  Lastly,  and  above 
•II,  let  the  parish  priest  intimate  to  his  flock,  that  they  become  accustomed  ofti  n 
Io  commend  themselves  to  GotJ,  begging  of  him  holy  perseverance  through  the 
a«rits  of  Jesus  Christ  and  tf  Mary."    Id.  ib. 

**  A  certain  image  of  tne 
Eadc«mer,**  so  says  the  saint,  **once  upon  a  certain  occasion,  spoke  to  the  ven- 
erable brother  Bernard  of  Corlion,  who  hegged  of  the  tmmg€  to  let  hiui  know 
whetber  it  wished  him  to  learn  to  read?  and  the  cruci/ix  anmotred^  *  What  wil 
it  avail  thee  to  learn  to  read?  What  are  books  to  tiiee?  1  am  tby  book,— this  is 
cnoueb  for  thee.**    Id.  ib.  N.  t20. 

••  Now,  that  this  is  the  very  kind  of  reading  that  papists,  or  at  least,  those  who 
wbh  to  be  saints,  are  addicted  to,  let  us  turn  tu  the  great  Bernard,  and  hear 
what  he  says  on  the  subject  of  such  books.  This  saint,  speaking  of  the  Romish 
churches,  exclaims,  *♦  There  is  so  great,  and  such  an  astonishinj^  variety  of  dif- 
ierent  figures  (imagea)  presented  on  all  sides,  to  the  view,  that  the  people  prefer 
rfsadjng  upon  t^he  marble  stones,  than  reading  in  books,  and  k>  spend  the  whole 
day  m  wondering  a^  these  things,  rather  than  in  meditating  upon  the  Law  of 
p^d.**  Bernard,  Apol.  p.  992.  The  same  saint  says,  **  The  bishops  excite  the 
lliifciftoii  of  flt  emmd  W^l'fdtd people  by  eotpotai  ommmmts,  because  Ihev  cannot 
fk  U  hffiin$mt      ^d.  tti-    The  saint  does  not  mean  that  tbeir  devotion  is  ex- 


SOMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


197 


:itcd  by  such  shows,  for  just  before,  he  said,  that  these  carnal  minded  peopi* 
'preferred  spending  the  whole  day  in  wondering  at  these  thing?,  rather  thaa 
to  be  meditating  on  the  law  of  Gocf."  He  could  have  meant  nothing  else  there- 
fore, than  that  these  splendid  images  were  placed  in  the  churches  under  the 
PRETEMCE  of  exciting  dovotion,  while  the  real  object  was,  that  the  **  foolish 
people,"  (as  he  calls  them,)  "  might  BESTOW  A  GIFT."  Id.  ib.  •*  O  Crux  ave, 
spcs  unica!"  **  Hail,  O  Cross,  our  only  hope!"  as  exclaims  the  Romish  church 
in  her  "  Brevlary." 

■'  *'  Besides  the  little  images  of 

Christ  crucified,  and  of  the  Blessed  Virgin,"  continues  the  saint,  "which  tha 

Iiriest  ought  to  be  careful  to  place  near  the  sick  person,  if  it  can  be  done,  let 
lini  aUo  place  before  his  eyes  large  images  of  the  Mother  of  God,  and  the  Re- 
deemer, tnat  the  sick  man,  turn  which  way  he  will,  may  see  them  and  commend 
himself  to  them."     Id.  ib.  N.  235. 

So  much  for  this  lesson  on  the  morality  of  the  Romanist  rule  of 
faith.  On  these  matters  we  have  not  time  to  comment.  For  those 
who  think  they  need  a  comment,  my  worthy  friend  knows  how  to 
manage  the  cause  admirably !  His  talents  suit  this  exigency.  He  is 
fluent  in  all  the  dogmas  of  Catholicism.  To  these  he  has  devoted 
many  years  and  is  a  good  judge  of  a  certain  class  of  human  nature. 
He  knows  the  power  of  a  laugh — ^an  anecdote — a  sigh — a  complimeni 
— a  picture — ^and,  above  all,  he  knows  how  much  it  weighs,  with  one 
class,  to  say,  with  a  triumphant  air,  "  There's  logic  for  you  !"  **  what 
an  argument  is  that !"  "  I  have  proved  it  now !"  "  this  is  sound  logic !" 
"my  friend  Mr.  C.  feels  it — it  is  the  badness  of  his  cause— my  cause 
is  so  good,  so  ancient,  so  venerable,  so  holy,  so  catholic !"  &c.  &c.  I 
sny,  in  this  sort  of  rhetoric,  my  learned  opponent  is  an  adept.  It  has 
only  one  fault,  it  is  too  luscious  sometimes,  and  he  lays  it  .on  rather 
thick,  to  stick  long  upon  the  audience.  He  is  performing  his  part 
nobly !  For  myself,  I  regard  all  this  as  a  grave,  serious,  scriptural  and 
rational  discussion ;  I  expect  the  good  feelings  of  my  audience,  of 
which  I  am  already  conscious,  only  by  addressing  myself  to  their  un- 
derstanding, and  in  the  cool  argumentative  dignity  of  reason,  fact,  and 
argument.  But  really,  no  man,  in  my  knowledge,  could  sustain  the 
Romanist  cause  better  than  my  learned  and  ingenious  respondent ;  and 
if  he  fails,  Roman  Catholicism  in  the  West  need  not  look  for  an  able' 
defendant. 

MjT  friend  has  admitted  the  seven  methods  of  electing  popes,  but 
says  it  is  no  matter  how  they  are  chosen.  Americans !  How  would  you 
relish  such  doctrine  in  respect  to  your  governors,  judges,  and  presi- 
dents 1  If  some  city  or  county  in  this  state  should  elect  a  governor 
for  the  whole  state,  would  it  make  no  difierence  to  you  !  Should  your 
chief  magistrate  be  elected  by  a  mob,  by  a  party,  or  by  force,  or  brib* 
ery,  would  you  say  it  matters  not — the  virtue  is  in  the  office,  no  matter 
how  the  incumbent  has  come  into  it?  ! 

The  *^  Palladium*'  and  **  Baptist  Banner"  prove  as  much  against 
Protestantism,  and  for  Catholicism,  as  they  deal  in  ribaldry  and  per- 
sonal abuse.  If  these  are  arguments  on  which  the  bishop  relies,  they 
may  be  gosd  authority  for  him ;  but,  for  myself,  I  need  no  such  logic, 
and  my  cause  disdains  such  auxiliaries.  He  has  great  use  for  Unita- 
rians also,  and  sometimes  for  Universalists,  and  even  Quakers ;  but 
in  his  last  argument  he  has  mistaken  the  point.  These  all  appeal,  in 
their  controversies,  to  the  bible  alone,  just  as  the  Jansenists  and  Jesu- 
its, thp  Dominicans,  Bernardites,  Benedictines,  Franciscans,  &c.  &c. 
whili;  they  hate  disliked  and  opposed  one  another,  all  acknowledge  the 
po^  as  supreme  head  of  the  church,  the  judge  of  controversies. 


I 

■pi"'! 


CltW       will  M 

D'SBAXJS    un    TIES 


I  111  glad  that  lie  has  at  last  admitted  that  the  Jansenists  in  all  eseen 
tials  are  Catholics,  and  that  they  are  repudiated  only  for  a  difference 
of  opinion.  But  where  now  are  his  objections  against  Du  Pin !  He 
objeeled  to  htm  that  he  was  a  Jansenist,  as  if  a  difference  in  opinion 
dtttroys  the  eredibilitv  of  a  witness — a  principle  that  forever  roots  up 
all  history;  for  no  one  upon  this  principle  is  authentic,  unless  he  be  a 
Rdniui  Catholic ;  nor  then,  unless  a  Jesuit,  and  this  is  equivalent  to 
saying,  that  no  one  is  authentic  unless  he  hear  witness  for  him. — [Time 
•xpiml.] 

Twelve  o'clock,  M, 
Bishop  'Puecell  risei — 

I  shall  begin  where  my  friend  left  off.  I  am  charged  with  appeal- 
iif  til  tiie  feelinf,  and  not  to  the  reason  of  my  hearers :  ^  my  rhetoric 
la  tmi  luscious ;  1  lay  it  on  too  thick ;  it  won't  stick,"  &c.  &c.  Well ! 
if  my  rfietoffic  is  too  luscious,  that  of  my  friend  is  too  insipid ;  if 
mine  Is  too  thick,  his  is  too  thin.  The  fallacy  it  would  coyer,  grins 
through  the  flimsy  gossamer :  the  weakest  eyes  can  see  it  beneath 
the  veil.  But  I  trust,  I  need  not  offer  any  vindication  of  my  argu- 
ments to  this  assembly.  They  are  able,  and,  I  thank  God,  willing, 
too,  to  judge  for  themselves.  They  see  that  all,  or  the  main  force  of 
my  friend  consists  of  two  renegade  pneats.  Smith  and  Du  Pin. 
These  are  the  two  pillars  of  his  logic.  The  published  volume  will 
■hew  how  superior  and  how  honest  are  mine.  In  the  oral  debate,  I  ad« 
diws  the  judgment,  without  neglecting  the  heart :  and  if  I  did  pre- 
Wll  my  argument  chiefly  to  the  former,  it  would  be  because  of  an 
lAeervatiou  of  the  celebrated  John  Randolph,  in  the  Virginia  conven- 
tion for  altering  the  constitution  of  the  state.  Speaking  of  my  learn- 
ed opponent,  who  was  a  delegate  to  that  convention,  Randolph  said, 
••  He  had  politics  in  his  heart  and  religion  in  his  head."  1  cannot 
▼ouch  for  the  authenticity  of  the  anecdote,  I  have  just  heard  it.  I  hope 
It  was  not  founded  in  lact^— [Mr.  C.  explained— Mr.  Randolph  had 
never  said  so  to  him.]  I  proceed  to  more  important  matters.  I  did 
mot  pretend  to  say  that  an  informal  election  had  any  force.  But  that 
inj  form  on  which  the  entire  church  agreed,  according  to  the  majority 

Srinciple  governiiif  our  own  elections,  was  valid.  It  was  Christ  who 
failed  the  constitution  of  our  church.  I  do  not  much  like  to  see  any 
eoiii|arison  instituted  between  it  and  the  works  of  human  legislators. 
But  if  closely  examined,  it  will  he  found  to  contain  the  excellencies, 
while  it  excludes  the  defects  of  the  most  popular  forms  of  civil  go- 
vernment. We  have  a  perfect  feature  of  the  Republican  Model,  in 
this,  that  with  us,  merit  is  the  grand  criterion  of  fitness  for  office.  No 
favoritism  is  allowed.  No  matter  how  humble  the  parentage  or  ob- 
aouie  the  kindred  of  the  individual,  virtue,  talent  and  common  sense 
me  enve,  sooner,  or  later,  to  elevate  him  to  any  situation  he  may  be 
mtfiaed  to  accepL  The  church  often  selects  her  chief  officers,  as 
God  did  David,  "  from  the  flocks  of  sheep,"  Ps.  7.  viu.  70.  from  the 
humblest  walks  of  life.  It  is  to  this  system,  of  giving  merit  a  fair 
Jeld,  that  we  are  indebted  for  the  brightest  ornaments  in  civil  so- 
ciety, a  Curran,  chosen  for  his  intelligent  blue  eye,  his  wit  and 
sidiuess,  from  among  his  playmates,  when  "M«y  thai  won,  laughed^ 
mmi  ik^  thai  lost  cheated ;''"  as  is  very  often  the  case. 

To  finish  the  conversion  of  tlie  Jew,  where  I  discontinued  my  ar^ 
gument,  at  half  past  eleven,  oo  different  principles.    He  knew  tliere 


SOMAN   CATHOLIC   KELI6I0N. 


199 


was  a  synacrogue  which  the  people  were  bound  to  consuU,  by  the  ex- 
press command  of  God,  and  that  it  was  no  servility,  it  was  blasphem> 
against  God  and  often  visited  with  the  heaviest  penalties,  even  m  this 
life,  to  oppose  its  authority,  or  to  contradict  its  teaching.     He  is 
therefore  prepared  to  hear  of  authority  in  religion— in  fact,  the  syna- 
gogue was  a  type  of  the  church,  its  introduction— as  the  church  is 
the  fulfilment  and  the  consummation  of  the  teaching  and  testimony 
of  the  LAW.    The  Jew  having  had  reason  to  question  the  truth  of  his 
leligion,  for  which,  he  remembers  he  had  often  read,  a  better  was  to 
be  substituted,  and  aware  that  the  time  marked  so  distinctly  by  the 
prophets  for  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  has  long  ago  past,  he  looks 
for  any  religious  society,  that  can  illustrate  the  splendid  prophecies  of 
Isaiah,  respecting  the  catholicity,  or  universal  diffusion  and  the  dura- 
tion of  the  church,  from  the  time  of  the  crucified  one.  He  has  only 
to  open  his  eyes  to  see  that  the  Catholic  church  extends  the  dominion  . 
of  Christ,  the  limits  of  his  spiritual  kingdom  from  sea,  to  sea.    Then 
he  looks  at  the  other  denominations.  He  finds  none  of  the  qualities  of 
such  a  kingdom,  in  them.    They  are  not  Catholic,  they  are  not  old, 
they  are  not  uniform.  They  are  the  contrary  of  all  this.  This  is  enough 
for  him.    He  uses  his  reason,  thus  far,  alone,  because  he  is  not  yet 
baptized.    Like  the  wise  men,  he  follows  the  light  of  that  star,  until 
he  reaches  Jerusalem — when  its  light  fails  him,  there,  as  the  star  did 
them,  he  asks,  as  they  did,  of  authority,  where  the  truth  may  be  found, 
and  reason  and  revelation  concur  to  shew  it  to  him  in  the  church. 
He  consigns  himself  to  its  guidance,  he  becomes  a  Catholic— and 
reason  tells  him,  every  day,  he  has  done  right.     He  lives  and  he  dies 
without  a  doubt  of  the  soundness  of  his  decision,  for  this  blessed 
security  is  the  distinctive  character  of  the  Cathoiic.    All  other  creeds 
based  on  the  essential  maxim  of  their  fallibility,  leave    the  human 
mind,  in  life  and  death,  a  prey  to  the  most  torturing  anxiety.     But  I 
have  not  done  with  this  very  instructive  incident  in  the  discussion. 
If  the  Jew  witnesses  an  occasional  scandal  in  the  church,  he  calls  to 
mind  how  Adam  fell  in  Eden,  and  Aaron  fell,  at  the  foot  of  the  smok- 
ing Sinai,  and  Heli  and  his  Sons,  the  priests,  fell  in  Silo,  and  that 
Christ  said  not,  reject  a  religion,  whose  ministers  have,  personally, 
transgressed,  but  on  the  contrary,  that  he  said :  "  Upon  the  chair  of 
MosiS  have  sitten  the  Scribes  and  the  Pharisees,     Ml  things  therefore, 
whatsoever  they  shall  say  to  youy  observe  ye  and  do  ye  .•  but  according  to 
heir  works,  do  ye  not^  for  they  say  and  do  not.    Thus  truth  is  not 
ibandoned  ;  if  the  bad  liver  meets  his  merited  doom. 

I  now  come  to  all  that  farrago  of  the  Renegade  Smithh  translation 
af  Liguori.  My  friend  says  the  Catholic  rule  is  immoral.  He  ap- 
proached this  topic  with  so  much  reluctance,  and  with  so  many  strug- 
gles, that,  conscious  of  his  having  nothing  true  to  produce  agains 
Catholic  morality,  I  was  going  to  say  to  him,  "speak  out."  But  I  didn't, 
and  now  he  has  said  all.  Well,  what  does  it  amount  to]  Why  to 
this,  that  the  Catholic  church  is  blackened,  but  beautiful  (Nigra  sum, 
sed  formosa^  as  the  spouse  says  in  the  canticle).  She  is,  though 
misrepresented,  fair,  though  slandered,  pure.  If  a  Catholic  were 
always  what  his  church  teaches,  and  the  sacraments  she  is  appointed 
by  Christ  to  minister,  give  him  grace,  to  be,  he  would  be  an  orna- 
ment to  human  nature,  as  well  as  to  his  faith.  But  "  the  Catholic 
rule  is  immoral  and  dispenses  with  the  law  of  God."  No ;  it  enfor- 
ces dreadful  penalties  here  and  eternal  tonnents  hereafter,  for  a  viola- 


200 


tMEMATm  ON  rai 


SOMAN    CATHOLIC    BBLIGION. 


201 


I 


tioii  of  the  law.    If  her  ministers  make  any  mitigation  of  her  strict 
code  of  morals  in  consequence  of  the  arduous  duties,  weak  health, 
or  oliMf  circumstances  of  her  children,  she  teaches  them,  that  if  thii 
alloMd  motives  of  such  mitigation  do  not,  indeed,  exist,  it  is  not 
*'^i  faithful  dispensation,  but  a  cruel  dissipation"  of  the  heavenly  or- 
dinances; that  the  priest  has  no  power  but  what  he  derives  from  God, 
ami  that  God  will  iniallibly  inflict  all  the  rigors  of  his  vengeance  for 
its  ahiBO,  as  well  on  the  priest,  as  on  the  people.    If  all  the  priests 
and  hishopa  in  the  world  were  to  pronounce  the  words  of  absolution 
over  a  sinner,  in  whose  heart  God  did  not  see  true  sorrow  for  his  fault, 
with  a  sincere  resolution  to  sin  no  more,  the  absolution  would  be  null 
and  void,  and  the  horrid  crime  of  sacrilege  superadded  to  the  previous 
guilt  of  the  transgressor.    The  hope  of  the  hypocrite  shall  perish, 
•ays  the  scripture.    We  have  a  maxim,  which  must  make  the  pope 
and  bishops  and  priests,  as  well  as  the  laity  tremble,  when  we 
approach  the  dread  tribunal  of  penance.    It  is  this :  **  a  good  confes- 
Sioi  is  the  key  of  Heaven,  a  bad  one  is  the  key  of  Hell.*'     How  ad- 
minhle  are  the  lessons  read  today  from  Liguon — and  they  were  faith- 
fully rendered  for  a  sinister  motive — and  how  well  does  the  Catholic 
church  describe  the  perils  and  the  obligations  of  their  sacred  office  to 
her  ministers !  Hence  it  is  that  we  assume  our  religious  robes  and  hear 
confessions  in  the  open  church,   where  are  also  our  confessionals, 
under  the  eyes  of  all.    If  Liguori  were  the  immoral  man  that  Smith 
would  make  Mm,  would  he  have  given  such  lessons  to  the  clergy 
and  pointed  out  so  impressively  the  dangerous  consequences  of  a  single 
indiseretioii,  or  the  slightest  familiarity  on  the  occasions  to  which  he 
was  adverting  I  "  I  made  a  covenant  with  my  eyes,  says  Job,  xxxi.  1- 
that  I  wonld  not  so  much  as  think  of  a  virgin ;  for  what  part  should 
God  from  above  have  in  me,  and  what  inheritance  the  Almighty  from 
on  high  I"  Liguori  says ;  •♦  He  that  does  any  servile  work  on  the 
Lord's  day,  let  him  do  penance,  three  days,  on  bread  and  water."  To 
what  does  my  friend  object  in  this,  on  the  score  of  immorality  1    Is 
It  the  enforcing  of  the  observance  of  the  sabbath  I  Surely  that  is  not 
iinmoral.  Is  it  to  the  severity  of  the  penalty  ?  But  did  not  God  ordain 
™®J*>™  of  death  asainst  the  n}an  who  gathered  a  few  sticks  on  the 
mMth  I  Liguori  allows  work  on  the  sabbath,  on  certain  occasions.— 
So  do  we.— Doctors  work  on  the  sa>bath,  without  sin.  So  do  printers, 
IhoMfh  I  think  not  always,  especiahV  when  they  publish  piout  lies 
"•^'Sfi*^®  Catholics.  **  Which  of  you,  says  Chnst,  whose  ox,  or  his 
■•■•  Mis  mto  a  pit,  will  not  quickly  dra.ir  him  out,  on  the  sabbath. 
If  a  house  is  on  fir©  on  the  sabbath,  will   not  the  Presbyterian  boll 
img  and  the  citizens  haul  out  the  hose  ana  engines?   Will  we  not 
•jywjj"^  New  Orleans'  profanity  on  the  sab- 

nS  i?^^'  ^®y  *™  "°****  Catholics,  many  of  t.Vem  are  infidels  and 
riowijiita,  who  there  break  the  sabbath— and  the  «"  sin,  though  bad 
fioigli,  18  not  so  bad  as  theirs,  who,  as  it  has  been  don©  elsewhere. 
Meet  in  gan|8  for  for^ries  and  other  such  frauds,  o.^  the  sabbath, 
uuatom  IS  fast  becoming  an  excuse  for  every  thinff."— .  Vo  where  doet 
Mgmn  m  ikig,  I  call  for  the  original.  Let  Mr.  C.  i  ^reduce  his 
^Tiyft!^-  1/ he  cannot,  what  wTu  this  community  th^nlc  of  him  I 

ItdI?n!rcTfi{^^/^'^P^r**^^^^^^         Maryibove  .Christ." 
It  «oes  no  such  a  thmg.    It  says  ••  enrsed  be  every  Goddess  w,  "^rship. 

1:.  iw  »k     '^^f°«'!  "Aoiwr  to  wkmn  Aimor."    We  know  and    pw 
rasa  that  the  mother  has  no  power  but  what  she  derives  from  the    H>n 


To  Him,  we  say :  "  have  mercy  on  us ;"  to  her  "  pray  for  us.  Mr, 
C.  says,  "  No  being  in  the  universe  should  be  called  mother  of  God, 
Was  not  Christ  God  I  And  does  not  the  gospel  call  Mary,  his  mo- 
ther !  Did  not  one  hundred  and  fifty  eight  bishops  so  call  her,  m  the 
▼ear  431,  in  the  council  of  Ephesusl  Who  is  the  intelligent  UUtw- 
lie,  as  my  opponent  states,  who  is  ashamed  of  what  the  gospel  and 
the  church  sanction  1  I  ask  who  is  he?  Let  us  have  his  name. 
The  streets  of  Ephesus  rung  with  loud  applause  when  the  decision  of 
the  council  was  announced,  vindicating  the  name  and  dignity  ot  the 
mother  of  God,  and  the  words  M«/>»*  0i3T«»oc  were  echoed  from  mouth  to 
mouth,  mingled  with  the  most  joyful  and  exulting  cries  of  the  populace, 
to  the  consternation  of  Nestorianism.  »Son!  behold  thy  mother!  were  a- 
mong  the  last  words  spoken  by  the  expiring  Savior  on  the  cross.  W  ill  my 
opponent  call  them  ill  timed  at  that  hour,  when  all  was  consummated . 

"The  Catholic  rule  makes  a  distinction  between  mortal  and  venial 
•ins."    And  why  should  it  noti     Does  not  the  bible,  which  propor- 
tions the  penalty  to  the  offence,  does  not  the  civil  law,  which  punish- 
es not  every  offence  alike,  does  not  common  sense  point  out  the  dis- 
tinction?    Is  it  as  great  a  sin  for  a  child  to  tell  a  little,  wAt/e  lie  to 
excuse  itself,  as  for  a  son  to  whet  the  razor  and  cut  his  father  s  throat  I 
I  am  sensible  that  a  lie  is  never  innoc^t.    Nor  do  I  excuse  it  under 
any  circumstances— but  it  is  of  various  shades  of  guilt,  according  to 
the  circumstances  when  it  is  uttered.    I  know  of  national  legislatures 
which  give  a  bribe  of  forty  pounds  per  annum  to  an  apostate  priest,  to 
tempt  him  by  filthy  lucre  to  act  against  his  conscience— and  which 
not  so  many  years  ago,  encouraffed  a  son  to  turn  Protestant,  by  em- 
powering him  to  take  his  father^s  estate  and  turn  both  his  aged  pa- 
rents and  with  them  his  brothers  and  sisters,  if  they  persisted  m  be- 
imr  Catholics,  out  of  doors,  and  it  would  be  easy  for  me  to  prove  that 
this  law  was  passed  by  many  Protestant  ministers,  and  that  it  was  not 
oner  scrupulous  in  point  of  morality  in  papistical  distinction  between 
mortal  and  venial  sins ;  but  let  us  have  more  of  Smith  s  translation  ot 
Liguori,  he  says  *  let  stolen  money  be  paid  for  masses  ?    No ;  he  says 
first,  let  the  rightful  owner  be  hunted  out  by  the  penitent  thief,  and 
to  him  let  the  restitution  be  made.    If  he  can  be  no  longer  found,  let 
the  money  be  given  for  masses,  for  his  spiritual  benefit,  or  distributed, 
for  his  sake,   in  alms  to  the  poor,  and  what  better  use  could  be  made 
of  it — what  better  counsel  given  ?  .        j  * 

Another  proof  of  Catholic  immorality  is  that  we  are  bound  to  go 
once  a  year  to  confession !  Where  the  immorality  of  this  is,  I  cannot 
conceive.  Is  it  not  good  to  be  obliged  to  examine,  at  least,  once  a 
vear,  if  not  more  frequently,  the  state  of  our  consciences  and  to  con- 
fess  ourselves  sinners  ?  Is  not  this  an  admirable  institution  for  the 
acquiringr  of  the  best  kind  of  knowledge,  the  knowledge  of  oneself  I 
Is  It  not  worthy  of  God  ?  Is  it  not  God  himself  that  instituted  it  1 
Did  he  not  leave  to  his  church,  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing  trom 
sin,  when  he  said  to  his  apostles,  after  having  mysternusly  breathed 
upon  them  and  given  them  the  Holy  Ghost,  "  Whose  sins  you  shall 
foreive,  they  are  forgiven,  and  whose  sins  you  shall  retain,  they  are 
retained :  Whatever  you  shall  bind  on  earth,  it  shall  be  bound  m 
Heaven,  and  whatever  you  shall  loose  on  earth,  it  shall  be  loosed  in 
Heaven."  John  xx.  23,  23.  And  my  friend  quoted  St.  1  homas 
Aquin,  and  St.  Augustin,  as  well  as  Liguori,  for  the  holy  rules  the 
priest  must  observe,  in  hearing  confessions.  That  establishes  the  im 
^  26 


JmvMmm' 


DEBATE  0?f  THK 


I 


nt  fact,  that  in  the  last  century,  and  in  the  fourteenth,  and  as  fai 
mk  as  the  £fth  age,  the  practice  of  confession  existed,  as  it  does  at 
the  present  day.  In  every  age  from  the  time  of  Christ  it  has  been 
piictised,  and  eipedence  has  proved  it  the  most  effectual  restraint 
that  relimon  has  ever  imposed  upon  vice,  on  passion,  and  on  human 
ffiilty.  Who  can  tell  what  crimes  it  has  arrested  1  What  virtue  it  has 
ppjserved  and  purified  1  What  restitutions,  of  reputation  and  of  for- 
tune it  has  caused  to  be  made  I  How  many  sinners  it  has  stopt  in  the 
ilewn-hlll  path  to  destruction  1  Voltaire  and  Chillingworth  and  a  hun- 
dred others,  not  Catholics,  have  pronounced  the  most  splendid  eulo- 
gies on  confession.  These  disinterested  witnesses  will  furnish  you 
smple  proof  on  this  point.  But  my  friend  before  he  closed,  uttered 
one  word,  while  he  read  from  the  catechism  of  the  council  of  Trent 
••Jten^  aprice,  ^c."  for  the  forgiveness  of  sin.  Now  in  the  name  of 
tfiith,  m  the  name  of  this  community,  I  ask  Mm  for  the  proof,  for  1 
pronounce  it  absolutely  false. 

Mr.  C.  explained  that  he  did  not  say  it  was  done  by  the  council  of 

imit. 

He  says  that  we  have  exalted  the  confessional  to  an  equality  with 
the  throne  of  gnuse.  Well  miffht  ii  be  the  footstool  of  that  throne, 
If  Its  pure  principles  were  earned  out.  On  the  throne,  or  in  the  con- 
fessional,  11  is  the  same  God  that  pardons  the  penitent  sinner.— [Time 
expired.]  *■ 


Mr.  Campbell  rises 


7%ree  o* clock,  P,  M. 


The  gentleman  challenged  me  this  morning  upon  an  important 
point,  vii.  that  Protestants  cannot  make  an  act  of  faith— that  is,  be 
perfectly  certain  in  their  belief  of  the  holy  scriptures,  or  of  Jesus  Christ. 
I  accept  the  challenge.     It  now  only  remains  for  him  to  appoint  the 
^me  when,  and  the  place  where,  and  I  will  meet  him  on  that  point 
But  that  is  not  the  question  for  to-day.     Let  him  not  think  to  take  me 
off,  by  raisinff  incidental  and  foreign  questions.    They  may  remove 
the  emmi  of  the  audience  for  a  while;  but  his  time  would  have  been 
better  spent  in  aniwering  my  allegations  on  the  great  question.    1 
limve  heard  not  one  answer,  as  yet,  to  the  question,  "  What  gives  gen- 
eral councils  their  infallibility  ?"   and  various  other  points  of  great 
moment  to  his  cause :  to  which  he  had  better  attend,  than  to  propose 
lew  debates.    I  will  remind  him  of  another  question  which  he  had 
better  solve.     '  ffow  am  a  tkoumndfallibkB  make  one  itifailible  ? '    Do 
"«yf  *>y  Meeting  together,  become  infallible  I   or,  by  an  ecclesiastic 
combination,  give  out  infallibility?    This  would  have  been  more  in- 
structive  than  much  of  what  the  gentleman  has  given  us.     He  obser 
ved  at  one  time  that  the  Jansenists  were  a  Roman  Catholic  sect.  But 
again,  he  says,  that  they  are  not  Roman  Catholics  at  all !    To  pre- 
serve the  union  of  the  chnrch,  their  plan  is  a  very  easy  one.     When 
peraons  dissent,  cut  them   off.    While  Jansenists  agree  with  the 
mtjofity  of  the  church,  call  them  good  Catholics :  when  they  dissent 
■»  they  do  in  some  very  cardinal  matters,  call  them  heretics  in  the 
bosoni  of  the  church :  but  not  cf  it.     But  the  gentleman's  explana- 
^T  r  S®  council  of  Trent  will  never  satisfy  Protestants.   The  coun- 
cil of  1  rent  at  one  session,  had  forty-eight  bishops,  forty-five  of 
whom  were  very  ordinary  men.     They  decided  that  the  Apocrypha 
and  tlie  Vulg;ite  were  authentic ;  that  the  LaUn  Vulgate  is  the  true  and 


BOMAN   CATHOLIC    KELIGION. 


203 


MilY  authentic  copy,  more  authentic  than  the  Greek  original.    These 
mftereHTften  b^^^  before  amongst  Romanists ;  kit  were 

HnTadjudicated  by  the  council  of  Trent     The  modern  doctrine  of 
Catholics  is,  that  a  simple  majority  is  infallible.     "That  the  opt »^ 
Jim^adoDted  by  the  majority  of  the  bishops  are  for  an  mfalhhle  rule 
Jf«?M  "    So  Ustheiorth^  bishop  of  Strasburg;  but  the  proof  is 
fn^her  matten    ^ow  the  pr  Jsent  dcJctrine  is    that  twenty-fi^^^^^^^^^^ 
ops,  being  the  majority  of  forty-eight,  are  infallible.  J.^^.^»"*^"  °*  ^ 
maiorilvof  a  council,  then,  is  the  essence  of  infallibility.     Father 
p3  who  writes  the  history  of  the  council  of  Trent,  a  ^ood  Catholic, 
trS?v'sa?sT"  beardless  youths  were  sent  to  that  council  by  the  pope 
t^oLiTmajorities  for  his  measures-That  the  pope  sent  packed  ju- 
rieswhoTn  every  question  were  expected  to  support  his  measures. 
So  irovoked  was  the  good  Catholic  with  the  aberrations  of  Trent,  that 
he  LTemnW  Tsseits  that  the  bishops  of  Trent  were  «  a  pack  of  mcar- 
n^t^tronl-'n^^      I  quote  1  Jvery  words.   He  v^  com^^^^^^^^^ 

that  the  pope  had  hired  and  sent  off  young  ^^^^Xf^th^e?^^^^^ 
the  empire  to  vote  as  he  pleased  to  dictate.  So  much  for  the  mtaiii 
hilitv  of  oecumenical  councils.  .  . 

My  Wend  has  pronounced  |1°*'??  e"'"™'"™/ "P°"  *«  P?'^^^ 
rinirt  of  the  Roman  priesthood,  and  has  extolled  the  purity  ol  ceUfr- 
fcvL  essential  to  perfect  holiness.    That  these  pnests  have  not  been 
STmSate  parities,  half  the  decrees  of  ^ese  vX-^f^^^^. 
Half  their  legislation  is  about  the  specks  and  Flemishes  ot  this  \ir 
rin  ori^s  hood,  as  if  they  assembled  for  the  purpose  of  hiding  their 
Ke    ThTbishop  quoted  Rev.  xiv.  4.  and  was  not  ashamed  before 
thraudience  to  apply  it  to  marriage.    1  blushed  for  our  audience, 
and  could  not  but  be  shocked  with  the  freedom  of  attack  »Poa  the  or- 
dinance of  God.     Marriage  is  the  oldest  and  most  venerable  institu- 
rinn^n  the  Srv  of  man.     God  himself  instituted  and  celebrated  it, 
on  the  flowerh7nks  oTEden  in  the  state  of  primeval  innocence  and 
Wi»      It  waTthen  and  there  said :  "  n  i.  n«*J<.»rf/-  "- '»  ^  -^- 
I  beUevewith  Paul  that  marriage  is  honorable  '"  ««•     *™  ^T^w 
ritv  "earth  knows  no  purer,  no  holier  state  than  *^»  "V''"/? ';";r;  , 
aZi'c™[w  I  tell— or  dare  i  tell  before  this  assembly,  but  half  that  I 
^^veTeStS  o"thaT^?Jn  state  of  which  ^y  ^f  "J-peTceli^ 

p™,  U  miy  be  convenient,  I  prefer  a  single  «t««e '^"t  *»S^' 
LJiLnr  female  who  for  the  sake  of  greater  punty  prefers  celiDacy, 
l^\l  tlTet'  the^el;  first  principle!  of  both  rdigion^nd  morjai^ ; 
and  is  as  for  out  of  the  tract  of  truth  and  reason,  as  he  that  would  cut 
off  his  own  hands  to  prevent  him  from  plunder.  ^^^^  man 

Tt  i«  essential,  in  my  opinion,  that  the  bishop  be  a  "jarned  man. 
TnJ  Jd  ^h^  Holy  Spirit  by  Paul  has  decreed,  that  he  should  be  the 

tion,  he  should  have  all  a  chrisUan's  feelings  and  experience. 


e 


•hmli  kiow  ©xperimentally  the  domeatic  aneetions  anii  relationt. 
Me  MhmW  study  human  nature  in  the  bosom  of  his  family.  There  la 
a  class  of  feelings,  which  no  gentleman,  of  single  life,  can  compre- 
Jiend ;  or  in  which  he  can  sympathise :  and  these  are  essential  to  that 
intimacy  with  all  classes,  sexes  and  duties,  which  his  relations  to  the 
church  often  impose  on  him.  If  he  does  not  know  how  to  rule  a  sin- 
gle  family,  and  to  enter  into  all  its  customs  and  feelincrs  with  practi- 
cal skill,  how  can  he  take  care  of  the  church  of  G^  I  So  arguet 
Paul :  and  so  must  I  reason  and  judge. 

Next  to  his  remarks  against  marriage,  as  necessarily  less  pure  than 
celibacy;  I  was  sorry  to  hear  the  gentleman  defending  "white  lies," 
and  « little  sins."    When  I  think  of  the  nature  of  sin,  and  the  holy 
and  imniiitable  laws  of  God,  against  whom  it  is  committed,  I  see  no 
difference  between  one  sin  and  another.    There  may  be  great  and  lit- 
tle sins  as  to  their  temjioral  relations  and  Consequences :  but  when  HE  " 
arainst  whom  every  sin  is  committed,  and  that  divine  and  holy  law, 
which  IS  violated  in  the  least  offence,  is  considered ;  we  must  say  with 
the  apostle  James,  "  He  that  offendeth  in  one  point  is  guilty  of  all." 
It  may  be  the  veriest  peccadillo  on  earth  :  but  in  Heaven's  account, 
one  sin  would  ruin  a  world,  as  it  has  done,  for  he  that  keeps  the  whole 
law  and  yet  offends  In  the  least  point,  is  guilty  of  all.   He  that  said, 
not  a  jot  or  titll©  of  his  law  shall  fall  to  the  ground— He  that  maffni- 
lied  his  law  and  made  it  honorable,  will  suffer  no  person  to  add  to-- 
to  mlMtoael  from,  to  change  or  to  violate  a  single  point  with  impunity. 
I  wish  the  gentleman  would  come  up  to  the  point  and  defend  hii 
Catholic  rule,  that  I  might  fully  deliver  myself  on  this  subject;  but  1 
have  as  vet  given  a  very  few  instances  of  the  impurities  and  immoral- 
iiiea  of  hit  rule  of  faith.     But  from  the  specimen  given,  I  would  ask, 
does  it  not  teach  the  worship  of  creatures  and  the  images  of  creatures— 
does  it  not  countenance  idolatry  1    Does  it  not  command  the  invo- 
ealion  of  the  spirita  of  dead  men  and  women !    Are  not  multi- 
tudes of  saints  invoked,  of  whose  abode  in  heaven  there  Is  no  witness 
on  earth  I    Does  it  not  pay  religious  homage  to  beings,  who  by  nature 
are  not  God  !     Does  it  not  blaspheme  the  name  of  God,  and  his  apos- 
tles and  prophets,  who  are  in  heaven !    And,  may  I  not  add— does  it 
not  annul  the  laws  of  God,  and  by  a  system  of  unparalleled  casuistry 
set  aiide  every  moral  obligation  I 

Th*  maeman  represented  confession  as  a  christian  duty.  So  it  is : 
bnt  not  aifffsilareonfession;  not  confession  to  a  priest.  Leo  I.  opened  the 
flood-gates  of  impurity  by  ordering  and  substituting  private  confession 
to  a  pnest;  for  public  confession  before  the  whole  congregation.  Tho 
j^mtrenelimentapinst  the  rapid  declensions  of  public  morals  In  the 
iili  tiiitwy,  was  broken  down  by  their  dispensing  with  public  for 
**I!5L^  "ST***"*  ^^  aensible  historians,  or,  rather,  commentatore 
on  iiiiloffa  iiola,  a^iee  that  there  was  no  greater  check  to  flaffitious 
iiiiiwee  than  bringing  the  defaulter  before  the  whole  congregaUon ;  and 
this  being  commuted  into  auricular  confession,  inundated  the  church 
with  unparalleled  impurities  and  immoralities.  "  Confess  your  faults 
one  to  another,"  is  not,  whisper  your  faults  into  theeare  of  your  priest* 
Why  do  not  the  priests,  on  this  their  proof,  confess  their  faults  to  the 
people  1— c«ii/eM  to  one  another!  But  this  authorizes  no  man,  no  woman 
to  degrade  themselves  by  falling  upon  their  knees  before  an  old  or  youna 
liachelor,  and  telling  to  him  all  their  impure  and  sinful  thoughts,  words 


ItOSKAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


305 


.»  h.  ronfeBsed  The  secrete  of  all  hearte  are  his;  and  he  has  gra- 
I'sl^asrurfdusAl;:,  he  will  hear  0,e  -k-tl^Tdlr  U 
Ud  confessions  of  all  who  approach  him  'hro-gh  <*«  r«  ^«^"^g<^'J 
Uieremore  condescension  or  mercy  in  a  Roman  P"**' *»»  "  ^?^' 
NoT my  friends,  there  is  no  ear  more  ready  to  hear  'han  his ,  and  he 

onl*?  »n  forgi»;.  To  snppose  the  contrary,  »•«'»''««  *^°"y>/„tX 
San  institution,  and  argues  consammate  ignorance  o*^  <5<«*-  " '^  "^°''{ 
S,mpTble  ,rith  thel^nius  of  the  religion,  ""djep-'g-"'  '^,^»^\»^« 
law  and  gospel.  And  with  what  propriety,  modesty,  piety,  n«>e8  »"» 
fcm,lM  old  and  Toune,  should  mutter  their  sins  and  secrets  inw  the 

■"'The "wntl"^  objects  to  some  of  my  reasonings.   He  sm  »hat  *• 

1  he  p"»'«"T  °  l^Tiff  „f  sins  I    Does  he  wish  me  to  tell  the  whole 

t",^l     Is  Soffheprindplec  early  asserted  in  the  penances  already 

reaZi    Why  Bx  a  Panose  of  <Ar«  days  for  violating  the^^abba'h, jnd 

s^bfe  r^z  ^r  •  het"^:rn^  txz  t 

r,^    do'^nanw  all  his  life!    He  who  kills  a  common  man  does 
pe"nan^  tCfea" ;  but  he  who  kills  .  priest  must  do  penance 

'*The  ^ntman  says  there  is  no  possibility  of  ««•-'-' P/f°" '^«' 
.  prU  unless  contfition  be  "»--•  1^11%"  ^  ' ""co^lrUion  m 
S  In  order  to  receive  the  'J^™"'^ "' "I^'^rhe  have  kSrition."-Id.  ib.  N. 
JS-^ThTilnt'p  o3ht^i„''L'U';£n"^f'  .he  4U.  chapter  of  the  ,4lh  .. 
rion  of  the  coun°il  of  Tren.:-I.l.  ib      [Sy^v>».  p^lOS.  ,  ^ 

docirme  of  Luihtr,  or  Co^otn.  or  •l"*'^'*""*'"' "".  „  articles  of  the  church,  oi 
S'-^^-ro  tr t:tZo:l^it1:^'^'^icLt^C%L  whe«>n  the, 
f;t?^;rd  Xch*hey™l?ubHribe  with  a  greater  har-aony...  .  perfect  r»le 
of  Uieir  faith  and  aclioos,  that  is  the  BlBLK.  ,  p„^rt.iiU,  whatsoever 

"Tbe  Bible.  I  say  the  Bible  ""'X ',«.''''. 'lfS°"b°e  ^  indab.uble  c«.«- 

LreJSrioV^'uirt.!.''^.^^^^^^^^^^^     -'i^-  -' "-"  •■«'  "=-■•- 

s 


I 


i 


*   L   I 


DEBATE   ON   Till 

■naticd  pramiiniitioii.  I.  for  my  part,  after  •  long  mad  (at  I  wenly  beli«v«  ana 
hope)  iiiipartid  March  of  the  true  wmy  to  «/ef7tiir  fuvprnuM,  do  profeu  plajolf 
that  I  c|piii©t  find  anr  rest  for  the  sole  of  iiiy  foot  but  upon  this  rock  only. 

I  sm  plainly,  and  with  imne  own  eyes,  that  there  are  popei  arainst  popei, 
WMUcilt  against  councili.  some  lathers  agaiost  others,  the  mine  fathers  ag^alnst 
meniMlrea,  a  consent  of  &tbers  of  one  age  agaiost  a  consent  of  fathers  of  another 
•fe,  the  church  of  one  age  against  the  church  of  another  age:  Traditive  ioter- 
pretotions  of  scripture  are  pretended,  but  there  are  few  or  none  to  be  found: 
m  tradition  but  only  of  icripture  can  derive  Itself  from  the  fountain,  but  mar 
be  plainlj  proved  lo^be  brought  in.  in  such  an  agje  after  Christ,  or  that  auch  •« 
•ge  rt  fHi  not  in.  In  a  word,  there  is  no  sulficient  cerlainiy  but  of  scriptur« 
jnlj,  for  any  considerinr  man  to  build  upon.  This,  therefore,  and  this  onU  I 
Mmmmm  to  belicfe:  This  I  wiil  profess,  according  to  this  I  will  live,  and  Tor 
ttif  If  tlitre  be  occasion  I  will  not  only  willingly,  but  even  gladly,  lose  my  life, 
though  I  should  be  sorry  thai  chHstians  should  take  it  from  me. 

••ftopoje  me  any  thing  out  of  this  book,  and  require  whether  I  believe  or  no. 
iind^fisein  It  never  •©  incomprehensible  to  human  reason.  I  will  subscribe  it  with 
hand  and  heart,  as  kiwwkg  no  demonstration  can  be  ttronger  than  this,  "  God  hath 
WMitli^lore  It  IS  true.  '  In  other  things.  I  will  take  no  man's  liberty  of  iudr- 
tiigltNli  him;  neither  shall  any  man  take  mine  from  me.  I  will  think  no  man 
the  worse  man,  nor  the  worse  chrittian,  I  will  love  no  man  the  less  for  direrine 
in  opinion  from  me.  And  what  measure  I  mete  to  others.  I  expect  from  them 
■gwn.  I  am  fully  asinred  thai  God  does  not,  and  therefore  men  oiurht  not  to 
imire  any  more  of  anv  man  than  this,  to  believe  the  scripture  to  be  Godi 

VTmt^  ^'^T  *"***  "^"'^  °^  **'  "*^  "*  "^®  according  to  if- 

.^  fliijriMii/  3  o'clock,  P.  M 

Bmmm  Furckm.  rises— 

I  UBjniftuiiif  my  opponent,  to-day,  though  Tarious  assertions,  and 
iwm  endfsfora  to  establish  a^inst  the  Catholic  church,  the  charge  of 
mniorality.  I  said,  that  the  trrace  of  penance  was,  in  our  estimation 
to  miwerfii^  that  there  is  no  sin  which  it  may  not  efface  by  the  merc^ 
of  God.  This,  Mr.  C.  says,  is  a  proof  of  our  immorality  I  If  it  be 
immoial  to  lift  a  heart-broken  penitent  from  the  depths  of  despair,  and 
tell  him  there  is  hope  m  God,  my  friend  is  right.  Catholics  believe 
that  there  is  no  sin  which  God  cannot  forgive  to  sorrowing  man.  One 
drop  of  the  infinitely  precious  blood  which  was  shed  for  us  on  Calvarv 
la  more  than  sufficient  to  cancel  the  iniquities  of  a  thousand  worlds  • 

llilT  ^'"'  .wr  ^'Jf'  ^^i!**  ^^^  ^^^'^  ^^^y  »h^"  ^  made  as 
white  as  snow."  (Is.  i.  18.)    •*  Come  to  me,  all  you  that  labor  and 

»  Ufdeied,"  says  Christ,  "and  I  will  refresh  you."  (Matt.  xi.  28.) 

.«S!.l  *r  o  ®i  l^l  ^f  ^S'P^"''®  ^^""^^  «*" «"  iirremissible  sin,  a  sin 
tgwitt  the  Holy  Ghost"  That  sin,  my  friends,  is  indeed  a  deadly 
one.  1  hat  sin  is,  obstmately  ie«istin|r  the  known  truth,  and  final  im- 
pnitence,  the  almost  inevitable  consequence  of  sufferinr  ourselves  to 
be  MidM  by  religious  prejudice,  this  tin  is  more  common  than 
»»|.C»8  •  too  many)  are  willing  to  believe.  They  are  in  that  waT 
ijr  which  the  scripture  savs  :  "  It  utmeih  to  a  man  right  ,•  but  the  ends 
Aereof ^  lo  «fe«,/A.»'  (l$rov.  xvi.  38.)  To  such  Chrisl  solemnly  dc- 
*«•  that  " /%  shall  call  upon  him,  and  he  will  not  heart  and  they 
9Aali  rfte  m  thetr  «n."  Such  persons  as  these,  find  it  easier  to  accuse 
our  church  of  a  few  riots  in  liome,  or  elsewhere,  which  all  the  power 
of  religion  could  not  have  prevented,  (and  the  only  wonder  is  that  thev 
lilrfk  ***"*"" r'?'®  frequently,)  than  to  study  her  divine  evidences,  bj- 
llJl- ^  my«tenou8  truths  she  proposes,  and  practise  the  holy  lessons 
•he  enjoins.  But  I  niust  hasten  to  answer  the  multitude  of  hclercre- 
■ecus  questions  which  my  friend  has  proposed. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    BKLIGION. 


207 


«  What  givesieneral  councils  their  infallihility  V'  The  power  and 
omnSc?  of  6od :  the  Holy  Ghost  ab  ding  J!;^';^  ^'j^^^^^^^^^^ 
days,  until  the  consummation  of  the  world.-"  Can  *  thousand  talU 
Sres  make  one  infalliblel"     Yes ;  and,  according  to  y?J^  ^^^^^^ 
in<r  everv  one  of  twelve  fallibles  made  an  infallible;  for  you  allowed 
'thS  Z7wre  aposUes  were,  individually,  and  of  course  cf^^^h. 

^fallible.  And,  if  you  need  more  homely  ^""f^f  ^^^^^  wlS^s' 
that  because  one  thread  cannot  keep  a  seventy-four  to  her  moorings, 
that  a  rble  consisting  of  a  thousand  strong  threads  cannot  do  so  1 
wl^^B^c^^^^^^^^^^  many  can,  humanly  speaking:  how  much  more 
so  when  there  is  a  divine  promise :  "  f^^i^^^rT^Jll  fj  ^XJ 
the  gales  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  agmm  you.''  (Mark  xvi.  If.)  I  never 
Mid  the  ^nsenists  were  Roman  Catholics.  I  objected  to  Du  Pin  from 
Se  very  commencement  of  this  controversy,  on  the  ground  of  his  be. 
bg  a  Jansenist.    The  Jansenists  have  been  condemned  ^J  the  Popes. 

nfnce,  they  lose  no  opportunity  of  '«s"ii^«|  .^7v,t^%»?i^"e^ 
their  faults  and  suppressing  their  virtues.  My  friend,  then,  fo"owed 
a  notoriously  treacherous  |uide.  when  he  trusted  himse  f  ^„d  his 
cargo  of  nations  about  the  popes,  to  such  a  l*^^™^;'^^"  f^^^"  ^^^^^^^^ 
bid  as  the  Jansenists  are,  they  are  too  learned  in  ^^^^f  ^^istory  and 
in  the  scriptures,  to  become  members  of  any  Protestant  sect.  Their 
Llnificent  work,  The  Perpetuity  of  the  Catholic  Faith,  is,  probably, 
Te^lst  learned  productions^  in  the  annals  of  religious  contro- 

versr  I  shouW  L  happy  to  lend  it  to  any  gentleman  of  this  assem- 
7.%^\t^^%on.\T\.im  how  venerable  are  the  doctrines  whic^^^ 
wL  of  kuowkdge  induces  some  persons  to  assail.    J^f^^^^^P^ 
all  the  bishops  in  the  worid,  are  no  article  of  ^^  ^h.     Arucle^^^^^^^^  faigt 
are  defined,  and  they  are  no  longer  opinions.        Siquis  dixerit .        it 
anv  sav  -"in  this  manner  commence  the  canons  of  doctrine  to  define 
^ticLs^f  faith;  and  they  end  by  the  words,  "Anathema  sit;"  m  ini.. 
?a  on  of  S    P^^^^  who  slid :  "Were  I,  or  an  angel  from  heaven  to 
StoV  any  other  gospel  than  what  has  been  preached,  let  h.m 
L TiSt^eL"    ^his  for'muL  always  marks  ^he  definU.on^^^^^^^^ 
lie  faith   amonff  the  acts  of  general  councils.     But  it  will  mase  even 
Ihe  sma'tt^  e?s  in  theology,  the  scioUsts,  I  could  have  almost  ^.d   the 
whool-bovs  of  Earope,  faugh,  to  see  the  gentleman  gravely  quote  Via 
Paolo  oKer  PaSu'thelycophant  of  the  sena^  of  Vemce  .he«- 
communicated  monk,  or,  to  say  all  in  two  *°''l^r  *>'«  "  g^''^^^ 
kenlie."  ae  he  18  justly  called  by  the  Protestant  bishop,  Bur^t,  as 
his  a"  horU,  for  the  prieedings  of  the  bishops  in  the  council  of  TrenU 
»He  hid,"  says  Bossuet.  "the  spirit  of  Luther  under  the  frock  of  a 
monk."     Hendry  IV.  of  France  det^ted  h^.hyP^^y.  »"f.^<'»°""';^ 

him  to  the  senate  of  Venice:  and  ?»"»"««' «»°'''=';i^'™°Lnrf 
hundred  and  sixty  errors  in  h  8  pretended  history  of  the  council  of 
Trent  I  have  gS  Paolo  Sarpis'  Lok  in  English,  and  w'l>  P""«  «» 
■  him  some,a?leait,  of  these  errors,  if  he  is  quoted  again,  with  his  worthy 
^m^r^  Smith  and  Du  Pin!  Now  th.  truth  is,  that  there  were  upwarf, 
of  two  hundred  and  fifty  b  shops,  or  prelates,  of  different  nations, 
Sear'y  two  hundred  of  the  n^st  learned  theologians,  and  the  ambassa- 
do«  of  man.  Catholic  princel,  at  this  council.  It  was  held  •«  Tre"'- » 
rrcityTand  the  utmostliberty  was  allowed  «>  *^1'''=Tirco?.ncn  n^ 
ferentqoestion8,p.eviously  to  the  definitions  »' ^^''l^JJ^'^Z^nZt 
to  decide  anew,  what  had  been  alway,,  every  where,  and  oy  all  believes. 


t 


wtKi 


DBBATB  ON   THB 


^t 


in  the  Catholic  church ;  and  the  canon  of  scripture  which  it  defined,  was 
po  other  than  what  had  hean  nettled  in  all  the  previooa  councils  for 
upwards  of  a  thousand  years ;  and  this  the  whole  Catholic  world  per- 
fajij  mnderstood.   What,  now,  becomes  of  the  eentleinan*s  48  by  251 
Why  dues  he  exaggerate  in  Jigure*  when  he  talks  against  Catholics, 
mdMgwe  inmimahare  when  he  speaks  for  them  !    Those  beardless 
youths  he  speaks  of,  had,  I  presume  from  Italian  faces  generally,  as 
much  of  that  excrescence  as  other  animals  distinguished  by  a  late 
■eiator.    My  friend  was  quite  tender  to-day,  Indeed  excessively  elo- 
fnent,  on  the  subject  of  marriage.   Had  he  confined  himself  to  its  just 
Mttte,  as  the  primeval  institution  of  God,  on  the  flowery  banks  of 
Bdin,  without  outraging  the  express  declarations  of  Christ,  and  the 
Intpiiation  of  his  Holy  Spirit,  in  the  new  law,  I  would  have  repeated 
Witt  I  have  already  said,  in  acknowledgment  of  the  purity  and  sanc- 
tl^^of  the  nuptial  union.    But,  I  must  borrow  his  own  words;  lo  say, 
with  still  more  truth,  that  "  I  blushed  for  our  audience,  and  was 
shocked  by  the  freedom  of  his  attack  upon  the  ordinance  of  God." 
The  gentleman  may  talk  unUI  the  end  of  the  year,  and  I  would  meet 
iim  at  every  pause  with  the  words  of  Christ,  Matt.  xix.  18;  or,  if 
lli«M  are  noi  plab  enough  to  the  "sensual  man  who  thinketh  this 
^Ttue  foolishness,"  with  those  of  St.  Paul,  (1  Cor.  vii.)  «  /  would 
lAol  aU  mm  were  even  m  mpey."     ♦*  I  m^  to  the  unmarried  and  the 
mmm^  U  u  good  for  them  fTl%  «o  continue^  men  at  /."  ( ver.  8.)   ♦'  ffe 
mai  m  With  a  mfe,  ig  mHdtomfor  the  things  of  the  world,  how  ^ 
mmf  please  htswifcf  and  he  is  divided.    He  that  is  without  a  wife,  is 
mSmtamfir  the  things  thai  belong  to  the  Lord,  how  he  may  please  God. 
(verses  3i,  33.)     *'  Jrt  thou  loosed  from  a  wtfe^  seek  noi  a  wife  ,  .  ,  if 
f^^'^Z  7^1^:  **«  *«^A  no/  sinned.'  nenerthekss,  such  shall  have  triliL 
mmm  fihe^esL    Bui  I  mare  you  J'  (ver.  28.)     Can  holy  writ  mora 
nnequivocally  reprobate  all  the  ffentleman's  romancing  about  wedliH:k, 
to  thii  proscription  of  that  pure  devotedness  to  the  holy  offices  of  the 
luniftry,  of  which  Jesus  Christ,  St.  John,  and  St.  Paul,liave  left  us 
the  bnglitest  examples  in  their  own  persons  I   Mr.  C.  said  :  "  Dared  I 
to  tell,  hdbra  this  assembly,  but  half  that  1  have  learned  of  that  vinrin 
priesthood  :"  and  I,  my  friends,  dared  I  tell,  before  this  assembly,  but 
half  that  I  have  learned,  from  old  Protestant  residenters  of  this  citv, 
«f  that  married  priesthood,  in  Elyria,  on  Lake  Erie,  and  in  towns  in 
Oie  int«nor  of  this  stale,  without  casting  the  net  over  heads  nearer 
Momc,  I  would  fill  your  souls  with  tenfold  horror!    1  would  advise 
mj  fnend  to  tread  lightly  on  these  ashes.    Holy  as  marriage  is,  and 
inly  as  I  confess  it  to  be,  St.  Paul  advises  married  people  to  foreeo. 
at  cer^in  times,  the  privileges  of  that  state,  to  give  themsel^  to  prayer. 
Kf\<  2     •        **®"*®    **  commanded  in  the  prophet  Joel,  xi.  16. 
™  liiph-priest  was  forbidden,  in  Leviticus,  to  neglect  the  foreffoinir 
tnJniMSlions,  when  he  ministered  unto  the  Lord ;  as,  also,  to  take  a 
Widow  to  wife,  but  only  a  virgin.    Now,  a  widow,  according  to  my 
fnend  s  notion,  would  have  abetter  title  than  a  virgin  to  have  a  hiffh- 
priest  for  her  husband,  inasmuch  as  she  had  shown  her  reverence  for 
the  iistmion  of  marriage,  by  a  previtps  union.    And,  now,  let  me 
asic  again,  why  did  my  ojpponent  labor  so  hard  to  give  his  Protestant 
r!ft!!L!7  *;""*'*"";  ^^"^  **»«'f  ancestors,  when  it  is  well  known, 
l!1  «TT  ^^T*/**"?^™"^  marriage!    This,  the  Catholic  church 
Hit  md  donn.    But,  when  a  vow  is  made  to  God,  she  says,  with  St. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    BELI6I0N. 


209 


Paul,  (1  Tim.  ▼.  12.)  '*  ii  is  damnable,  in  either  man  or  woman,  to 
break  it."  Has  my  opponent  read  all  these  texts  T  Does  he  not  re- 
member to  have  read  in  history,  the  honor  in  which  the  light  of  reason 
taught  all  the  nations  if  the  earth  to  hold  virginity,  and  the  privileges 
to  which  it  was  every  where  entitled  !  Has  he  read  of  scandalous 
damages  recovered  in  courts,  in  England,  by  Reverends,  who  were 
mocked  to  scorn  the  following  Sunday,  when  they  went  into  the  pul- 
pit to  preach  1  Has  he  read  of  other  reverends,  who  have  had  to  pay 
damages  for  the  slanderous  reports,  put  in  circulation  by  their  fair 
companions  in  weal  and  woe  1  Is  this  the  tribulation  according  to  the 
flesh,  of  which  St.  Paul  speaks  !  "  The  decrees  of  councils  attest  that 
priests  have  not  been  such  immaculate  purities."  Well;  and  what 
do  these  records  of  the  civil  courts  of  England,  and  the  domestic  an- 
nals of  broken  hearts  and  blighted  honor,  attest  1  As  well  naight  the 
gentleman  charge  marriage  *ith  the  shocking  excesses,  which  it  did 
not  prevent  in  David  and  Solomon,  as  the  law  of  celibacy  with  the 
specks  and  blemishes  of  the  Catholic  priesthood. 

In  every  religion  there  will  be  bad  men,  and  by  them  every  virtue 
will  be  outraged,  but  must  we  on  this  account  blame  virtue  and  ex- 
punge it;  must  we,  like  Moses  descending  from  Sinai,  break  the 
tables  of  the  law,  because  of  a  stiff-necked  and  a  revolted  people ;  or, 
on  the  contrary,  hold  up  that  law  before  them  in  terror,  remind  them 
of  their  duty,  and  reclaim  them,  by  exhibitions  of  divine  justice  and 
mercy,  to  virtue  1    "  It  is  essential  for  a  bishop  to  be  a  married  man." 
And  the  gentleman's  vote  would  be  withheld  from  me,  because  I  am 
a  bachelor.     Why,  sir,  St.  Paul  does  not  mean  that  a  bishop  should  be 
a  man  of  one  wife,  but  that  ^e  should  have  had  but  one — otherwise,  as 
he  was  himself  unmarried,  he  would  have  acted  against  his  own  rules. 
Now  I  claim  to  be  as  clear-sighted,  and  as  well  read  in  the  bible,  as 
my  friend,  and  I  maintain  it  is  essential  a  bishop  should  not  be  a  mar- 
ried man;  for  he  will  not  then  be  afraid  to  bring  home  frona  the  bed  of 
death  the  small-pox,  the  cholera,  or  the  plague,  to  his  wife  and  chil- 
dren ;  he  will  not  be  prevented  by  the  enffrossing  care  of  a  family 
from  visiting  the  "  widow  and  the  orphan ;"  he  will  have  more  money 
to  spare  for  the  wants  of  the  poor.    "  To  preside  over  a  christian  con- 
gregation," says  Mr.  Campbell,  "  a  bishop  should  know  experimen- 
tally the  domestic  affections  and  relations;  he  should  study  human 
nature  in  the  bosom  of  his  family;  there  is  a  class  of  feelings  which 
no  gentleman  of  single  life  can  comprehend,  or  in  which  he  can  sym- 
pathise, and  these  are  essential  to  that  intimacy  (what  intimacy  ?)  with 
all  classes,  sexes  and  duties,  which  his  relations  to  the  church  often  im- 
pose upon  him."     What  does  all  this  mean  1    I  am  sincerely  shocked 
at  this  freedom.     But  if  it  mean  any  thing  that  I  should  answer,  it 
would  mean,  that  a  bishop  should  be  a  bachelor  to  sympathise  with  a 
numerous  class  of  christians,  viz.  old  maids ;  he  should  have  a  scold- 
ing wife  to  be  able  to  sympathise  with  a  scolded  husband ,-  a  sickly 
wife,  an  ugly  wife,  a  drinking  wife,  an  arbitrary  wife,  an  ignorant, 
stupid  wife,  to  know  experimentally  what  husbands  suffer  in  all  these 
domestic  relations ;  he  should,  and  he  should  not,  have  children.     Can 
there  be  any  thing  more  superlatively  ridiculous !   As  well  might  you 
exact  of  the  physician,  that  he  should  have  had  all  the  diseases  yon 
may  call  upon  him  to  cure.    A  bishop  can  study  his  own  heart,  and 
as  Cicero  says,  "Timeo  himinem  unius  libri;"  if  he  will  not  learn 
8  3  14  - 


If 


M^  DSBATB  Oil  TWm 

ininiliallin Here,  h»  will  not  learn  it  any  where.  I  haye  much  moi» 
til  mw  m  Hiit  snbjeet,  which  aueen  Elizabeth,  Oxford  college,  (Ens- 
laid,)  ngnktions  to  the  *•  fellows,"  and  Dr.  Miller,  of  Princeton, 
fnniithed  me ;  bnt  whether  I  resnme  this  unpleasant  task  or  not,  del 
pends  on  my  learned  opponent.  I  have  a  large  family  to  provide  for, 
and  I  try  at  least  to  take  caie  of  it.  Fifty  little  orphans,  in  want  of 
an  asylnin,  look  to  me  for  br^d !  and  as  Christ  and  St.  Paul  have 
tawf  ht  me  to  live,  while  I  have  ears  to  hear,  and  a  heart  to  commiser- 
■ifi  the  hard  lotofthe  fatherless  and  motherless,  and  claims  to  present 
ill  th«lt  name  to  a  geiwfous  public,  so,  must  I  reason  and  judge,  I  should 
continue  to  live.  These  little  beneficiaries  ^ther  around  me  when  I 
visit  them,  and  they  call  me  by  the  endearine  name  of  father!  and 
their  appealing  looks,  their  grateful  smiles,  Uieir  wants  and  artless- 
MS8  and  joy  excite  in  me  emotions  which  a  virtuous  parent  well 
■light  share,  and  an  unfeeling  one,  who  neglects  or  abuses  his  chil- 
(ben,  well  might  envy !  I  invite  my  friend  to  visit  these  little  inter- 
flfiig  orphans,  and  see  how  an  old  bachelor  gets  along  among  them. 

Did  I  leally  defend  white  lies!  I  think  not.  "One  sin,  in  the 
•ifht  of  heaven  is  as  ereat  as  another."  This  I  deny.  This  doctrine 
laps  the  foundation  of  sound  morals ;  it  leaves  us  no  energy  for  virtu 
om  effort;  it  writes  the  mysterious  "Mane,  Tecel,  Phares,"  on  the 
wall,  fof  the  iist  and  least  offence ;  it  has  no  warrant  in  scripture.  God 
nien  speaks  of  nations  filling  up  the  measure  of  their  guilt,  and  what 
eould  tiiia  mean,  if  one  sin  were  as  bad  in  divine  estimation,  and  filled 
If  aa  inaeh  space  as  a  thousand  !  It  is  true.  He  punishes  all  sins, 
i«t  not  alike ;  therefore  all  are  not  equally  heinous  in  his  sight  Mr.  C. 
Mys,  **  I  wish  the  gentleman  would  enable  me  to  deliver  myself,"  &c. 
Yoii  may  deliver  yourself  on  anjr  point  you  please,  I  have  no  objection. 

His  next  attempt  at  proof  of  immorality,  was  the  allegation  that  wo 
have  destroyed  the  second  commandment,  rejecting  the  law  against 
making  graven  images,  that  we  may  worship  creatures,  and  images 
of cieatnres,  and  introduce  idolatry!  the  invocation  of  the  spirits  of 
Jead  men  and  women,  &c.  &c.  My  friends,  this  charge  orleavina 
out  the  second  commandment  is  very  stale,  and,  no  doubt,  my  Prote^ 
tant  hearers  will  be  astonished  to  see  and  hear  for  themselves  that  it 
IS  utterly  unfounded.  Here  is  the  Catholic  catechism  of  this  diocese : 
it  thus  veads.  2.  "  Which  is  the  first  commandment!"  Ans.  "  /awi 
A^Lord^  %  Gid^  who  brtmgki  ihee  mi  (f  the  land  ^  Egypt,  and  out 
«fll«  imtm  if  bondage,  Tmu  ghaU  not  have  strange  gods  before  me, 
I*Mi  ikoM  ml  make  to  thy$elf  a  graven  thine,  nor  me  Hkeness  of  any 
Mugf  thai  is  in  the  heavem  above  or  the  earSk  beneath,  or  in  the  waters 
mmder  the  earth  i  thou  thaU  not  adore  ikem  mr  terve  them,^*  TheDouay 
MtteoMsm  is  e<|ually  full,  (hold*  it  open,)  so  are  d7  our  bibles.  I 
will  dtaplay  this  little  catechism  here,  or  I  am  willing  to  pitch  it 
aniiiiif  niy  andience  for  inspection.  They  will  see  that  it  contains 
the  commandment  in  full,  and  that  there  is  nothing  in  it,  in  violation 
of  the  law  of  God,  on  this,  or  on  any  other  subject.  It  is  an  admirable 
ahtliiniMit  of  faith  and  morals.  If  there  have  been  any  catechisms 
iraMished  without  the  commandments  in  full,  it  is  because  they  were 
pnhltshed  for  the  use  of  children,  whose  memories  were  not  to  be  en- 
eumbeted  bv  too  long  answers,  when  the  sense  and  substance  of  the 

Srecejjt  could  be  snfficiently  expressed  in  fewer  words.    As  to  the 
ivi»H»  of  the  commandments,  my  friend  knows  that  the  bible  was 


ROHAN  CATHOLIC    REUGION. 


211 


tot  originally  divided  into  chapters  and  verses  as  it  is  at  present, 
fiut  with  this  question  we  are  not  now  concerned. 

It  is  not  a  crime  to  make  an  image,  if  we  do  not  adore  and  worshin 
it  instead  of  the  Creator,  who  is  blessed  for  ever ;  otherwise  God  would 
have  transgressed  his  own  prohibition,  for  he  commanded  Moses  to 
make  a  graven  image,  namely,  the  image  of  a  brazen  serpent,  and  to 
set  it  up  before  a  people  exceedingly  prone  to  idolatry,  that  they  may 
look  on  it  and  be  cured  of  the  bites  of  the  fiery  serpents  that  stung  them 
for  their  murmurings  in  the  wilderness.    The  divine  lawgiver  also 
directed  (Exodus  xxv.)  two  images  of  Cherubim  to  be  made,  with 
tlieir  wings  overshadowing  the  mercy  seat  of  the  ark  of  the  cov- 
enant, towards  which  the  people  turned  in  prayer,  and  before  which 
Joshua  and  the  ancients  of  Israel  fell  flat  upon  their  faces  until  the 
evenine,  at  Hai,  when  they  were  defeated,  for  the  sin  of  Achan,  by  the 
men  of  that  city;  and  Joshua  said,  "Alas,  0  Lord  God,"  &c.  vii.  7. 
What  was  the  temple  of  Solomon,  built  by  the  special  directions  of 
that  God  who  had  forbidden  the  making  of  graven  images  to  adore 
and  serve  them,  but  a  temple  of  images  ?     Never  has  any  house,  per- 
haps, since  or  before,  not  excepting  the  celebrated  picture  galleries  of 
the  Louvre,  abounded  more  in  pictures  and  likenesses  of  things  in 
heaven  and  things  on  earth,  than  did  that  venerable  pile,  and  yet  God 
was  not  offended,  but  promised  that  his  ears  should  be  attentive  to  the 
prayer  of  him  that  prayed  in  that  place,  as  we  read  in  the  book  of  Kings. 
The  objection  is  unphilosophical,  as  well  as  unscriptural.     What,  I 
ask,  are  the  letters  G.  O.  D.  but  pictures,  representing  a  certain  ideal 
So  written  language,  when  first  used,  was  a  series  of  pictures,  as  every 
scholar  knows;  and  the  bible  abounds,  like  the  temple,  with  these  pic- 
torial signs.     Again,  where  is  the  immorality  of  looking  on  the  em- 
blem of  our  dying  Savior  1  Is  it  not  the  gospel  narrative  of  his  sorrows 
and  his  love,  condensed  1     The  council  of  Trent,  Sess.  xxv.  teaches, 
what  every  Catholic  knows,  "  that  while  we  venerate  the  memorials 
of  Christ  and  his  saints,  we  are  not  to  believe  that  any  divinity  or 
power  resides  in  them."    I  would,  therefore,  express  in  a  few  words, 
the  motive  of  our  respect  for  the  crucifix,  and  our  sense  of  its  lifeless- 
ness  and  want  of  power,  in  the  following  apostrophe :     "  Thou  canst 
not  see,  thou  canst  not  hear,  thou  canst  not  help  me,  but  thou  remind- 
est  me  of  my  God."  . 

Were  the  objection  of  my  worthy  opponent  rigorously  urged,  it 
would  be  impiety  for  the  orphan  girl  to  wear  around  her  neck  the  like- 
ness of  a  fond,  but  alas !  prematurely  deceased  mother :  or  a  soldier 
boy  the  miniature  of  the  father  of  his  country.  The  different  trades  and 
professions  should  be  arraigned  for  the  idolatrous  practice  of  suspend- 
ing before  their  doors  the  signs  of  their  various  occupations.  The 
United  States'  mint  would  be  a  factory  of  idols,  and  every  money- 
holder,  in  bank  notes,  or  the  hard  metal,  an  idolater !  Finally,  if  the 
Catholics  substitute  the  words  "  honor  and  veneration "  for  "  wor- 
ship," when  speaking  of  the  relative  respect  paid  to  the  emblems  of 
Christ  and  his  saints,  yet  even  the  use  of  this  word  could  be  defend- 
ed from  the  Bible, Chron.  last  ch.  where  the  people,  as  it  reads  in  ihe 
Protestant  bible,  worshiped  the  Lord  and  the  King,  but  surely  not  with 
the  same  kind  of  worship.  The  exterior  act  appeared  the  same,  but 
in  the  heart,  there  was  distinction  of  homage.  If  it  be  wrong  and  an 
outrage  to  the  mediation  of  Christ  to  seek  inferior  intercessors  with 
God,  why  did  Paul  ask  the  prayers  of  the  christians  to  whom  he  ad- 


i. 


Ill  ■: 


J. 


I- 


I'll 


212 


DSBATX  OK   THS 


BOMAN   CATHOMC    EBLIfilOX. 


213 


dinttod  li!f  «|ii8tle«  I  Wliv  did  God  command  the  importunate  friendt 
viloh  to  aai  the  jiitt  mm/s  prayers  for  them  !  Why  did  he  appoint 
»  piiett  to  offer  gfifb  and  aacrifiees  for  sin  ?  And  why  did  the  apos- 
llet  teach  us  to  say,  **  I  beliere  in  the  communion  of  saints/*  //  wm 
iinmgef  smid  king  Jamat^  to  the  Scotch  bithopi,  to  allow  those  honorable 
phem^  in  the  ehurehe^  to  itfitcorfM,  Uom<,  and  devih,  (griffins)  which 
were  refmed  toprophei§  iwwl  apo»tle»  !  "  Let  them  not  lead  people  by  the 
iiiiic,**  ifif s  Dr.  Herbert  Thomdike,  Prtitendary  of  Westminster,  "  to  be* 
Bim  lliy  eon  prove  their  tuppoaition  that  the  pope  is  anii-christ,  and  the 
'pe^itk  'i^MaierSf  when  they  can  notJ*  Just  Weights  and  Measures, 
•  11.  '*  It  is  a  shame  to  charge  men  with  what  the^  are  not  guilty 
©f,  in  order  to  make  the  breach  wider,  already  too  wide."  Dr.  Mon- 
tague, Prot.  bishop  of  Norwich,  Iny.  of  Saints,  p.  60. 

Another  proof  of  immorality  is  the  distinction  oetween  material  and 
formal  sins !  This  is  a  just  distinction.  The  civil  law  recognizes  it. 
An  injury  done  with  malice  aforethous^hi,  or  formally ,  is  very  different, 
88  to  the  guilt  of  the  agent,  from  accidental  and  unintentional  injury. 
A  child,  a  maniac,  a  man  in  his  sleep,  or  otherwise  unconscious  of 
what  he  does,  and  not  the  culpable  cause  of  that  want  of  conscious- 
mia,  may  iniict  an  injury,  with  impunity,  for  which  liberty,  and  life 
should,  under  different  circumstances,  be  very  justly  forfeited.  My 
friend  has  brought  up  casuistry.  The  tendency  of  such  punishments 
is  salutary :  and  if  a  seyerer  penalty  is  inflicted  for  the  murder  of  v 
piieit,  Iec.,  it  is  to  preserve  the  mviolabilitv  of  religion,  which  watchei 
wrm  the  lights  of  parents,  to  the  fear  and  love  of  their  children,  and 
of  the  law,  to  the  obedience  and  respect  of  those  for  whose  preserva- 
tion and  wellbeinff  it  was  enacted.  My  learned  friend  traduced  the 
cler^  of  the  Catholic  church  and  described  the  dangers  of  the  con- 
fessional. As  well  might  he  denounce  the  medical  profession.  He 
read  numerous  extracts  from  publications  of  Smith,  Slocum  &  Co'a 
joint^stock  concern,  for  the  defamation  of  innocence.  He  may  sit 
i«Wi,  In  the  lowest  places,  with  these  worthy  associates,  if  he  will.  I 
•hall  not  molest  them  in  their  calculations  of  the  ^^ pieces  tf  silver," 
♦«I  will  leave  them  alone  in  their  glory." 

The  gentleman  allows  that  auricular  confession  was  the  law  of  the 
church  in  the  fifth  cemtarj.  This  is  generous,  and  he  is  contradicted 
in  the  concession,  by  aorae  Protestants,  who,  for  want  of  better  knowl- 
edge, give  the  instituticiii  m  later  date.  It  remounts,  however,  farther 
up  the  chain  of  loly  uaagea,  viz.  to  the  time  of  Christ,  who  gave 
such  power  to  men  aa  that  expressed  in  the  text,  St.  John,  xx.  22, 23. 
lliia  power  was  not  to  be  exercised  without  a  knowledge  of  the  dis- 
positions of  the  sinner,  and  this  knowledge  could  only  be  obtained 
from  his  own  confession.  Leo  I.  did  not,  therefore,  '*open  the 
floodgates  of  tnipiety  by  substituting  private  for  public  confession." 
The  practice  is  of  divine  institution,  and  how  horrid  is  it  not,  to  speak 
thus  of  what  all  ages  and  nations  of  Christianity,  the  Greek  and  the 
IiaSiii  churches  and  the  sects  of  the  east,  have  ever  held  as  the  work 
«f  Christ,  taught  by  himself  and  every  where  preached  by  his  apos- 
tles !  Tertullian  and  Origen,  who  lived  in  the  age  next  to  the  apos- 
tles, hold  the  following  language  :  *•*•  If  you  withdraw  from  confession^ 
Mnk  of  haUfre^  which  confession  extinguishes.''  '^Look  carefully  itbout 
ihee  in  choosing  the  person  to  whom  you  confess-^^onfess  to  him  your  mosi 
merei  sins."  *•  M  is  meessary^"  says  St,  Basil,  in  the  4th  century,  **  to  con- 
fesa  our  sim  to  ^oae  io  whom  the  dtspemation  tf  the  divine  mysteries  m 


eommitted,"  ^*  Let  no  one"  says  St.  Augustine,  **  fay  to  himself  f '  Ida 
penance  to  God,  in  private,'  Is  it  then  in  vain  inat  Christ  has  said,  what^ 
sttever  you  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loused  in  heaven  ?  Is  it  in  vain  that 
the  keys  have  been  given  to  the  church  P^  These  texts  abundantly 
prove  that  auricular  confession  was  practised  before  the  time  of  Leo  L 
in  the  fifth  century,  and  consequently  that  Christ  and  his  apostles 
must  share  the  odium  in  which  my  opponent  presumes  to  involve  the 
Catholic  church.  He  says  the  practice  of  the  public  confession  of  sin, 
before  the  whole  congregation,  was  the  last  entrenchment  against  the 
rapid  declension  of  morals  in  the  fifth  century.  And  yet  with  glaring 
inconsistency,  after  contending  for  the  practice  so  vehemently,  in 
almost  the  same  breath,  he  tells  us :  "  There  is  no  ear  but  God's,  to 
which  our  errors  or  our  faults  ought  to  be  confessed,  for  that  the 
secrete  of  all  hearts  are  his."  Can  there  be  contradiction  more  palpa- 
ble 1  And  does  not  the  Catholic  practice  save  the  sinner's  honor,  gently 
withdraw  him  from  the  downward  path  to  ruin,  admonish  him  of  his 
ingratitude  and  restore  him  to  religion  and  to  society  a  better  man, 
in  all  probability  to  sin  no  more  ?  "  Is  there  more  condescension  or 
mercy  in  a  Roman  priest,"  asks  my  opponent, "  than  in  God  V  Why, 
the  blasphemous  question  might  have  been  put  to  Christ  by  the  leper, 
when  the  Savior  ordered  him  ^^  to  go  show  himself  to  the  priest."  Malth. 
viii.  4.  "  Is  there  more  condescension,  or  mercy,  in  a  Jewish  priest  than 
in  GodV 

My  friend  quotes  St.  James,  "  confess  your  sins  to  one  another  :" 
but  he  takes  care  to  omit  the  ar^ecedents  and  the  consequents  of  the  text. 
"  Is  any  man  sick  among  you.  Let  him  bring  in  the  priests  of  the 
church,  and  let  them  pray  over  him,,  anointing  him  with  oil  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord,  and  the  prayer  of  faith  shall  save  tlie  sick  man,  and  if  he  be 
tn  sins,  they  shall  be  forgiven  him."  James  v.  14.  Is  not  obedience 
to  the  directions  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  calling  in  of  the  priests  and 
availing  himself  of  their  ministry,  the  indispensable  condition  prescri- 
bed by  God  himself,  in  the  scripture,  for  the  cure  of  the  corporal  mal- 
adies, but,  much  more,  of  the  sins  of  the  sick  man  ?  Could  my 
friend  have  been  more  effectually  refuted  than  he  evidently  is  by 
a  text  of  his  own  selection  %     [Time  expired.] 

Ihur  o'clock,  P*  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

From  the  beginning  I  have  said,  and  I  repeated  it  yesterday,  that 
1  would  not  state  any  fact  which  I  could  not  sustain.  I  do  not  care 
how  often  I  am  put  to  the  test.  I  have  here  three  catechisms,  in 
which  the  second  commandment  is  omitted,  and  to  keep  up  the  number 
ten,  they  have  made  two  out  of  the  10th.  Here  are  two  catechisms, 
published  by  the  authority  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church.  The  title 
of  one,  from  the  highest  authority  since  the  council  of  Trent,  is  aa 

follows ; — 

"  The  most  Rev.  Dr.  James  Butler's  catechism:  revised,  enlarged,  approved, 
and  recommended  by  four  Roman  Catholic  Archbishops  of  Ireland,  as  a  general 
catechism  for  the  kmg^dom.  Suffer  little  children  to  come  to  me,  and  •jrb'id 
them  not,  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God.  Mark  x.  14.  This  is  etema  life, 
that  they  mi^ht  know  thee,  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ,  whom  thou 
hast  sent  John,  xviii.  3.  Twelfth  edition:  carefully  corrected  and  improved, 
with  amendments.  Dublin:  Printed  by  Richard  Covne,  4.  Capel  st.  Bookseller 
and  Printer  to  the  R.  C.  College  of  St.  Patrick  and  Maynooth,  and  publisher  to 
the  Catholic  Bishops  of  Ireland.  1826.*'    [See  page  36. 


BSBATS  OH'  fBM 

**  8^  IMI  'COMintliaillClltl'  01  ijnmi* 

A.  1.  I  MM  tile  Lord  tbj  God ;  thou  •bait  have  no  ttrsnge  gods  before  bm. 

t.  Tboii  shalt  not  take  ibe  name  of  the  L.ord  thy  God  in  vain. 

9.  Thorn  abalt  not  covet  thj  neighbor'*  wife. 
10.  Thou  shah  not  covet  thj  neighbor's  goods,    Eiod.  xx  J* 

Are  these  thi  ten  eommm^menia  of  Godf  as  all  Roman  Catholio 
children  are  taught !! 

The  single  fact  that  the  four  archbishops  of  Ireland,  and  the  Rom* 
an  Catholic  college  of  Maynooth  should  have  impiously  dared  to 
ilrike  mm  commandment  from  the  ten,  which  God  wrote  on  two  tables 
with  his  own  finger,  and  should  have  chan^d  and  divided  the  tenth 
Into  two,  speaks  volumes  in  proof  of  my  allegata  against  the  Romanist 
rule  of  faitn.    But  we  shall  hear  another  witness — ^Title: 

•*Tlie  Ctoneral  Catechism  revised,  corrected  and  enlarged  by  the  Right  Rev- 
•ffttiidJillMt Boyle  D.  D.  Bp.  &c.  and  prescribed  by  him  to  be  taught  through- 
oat  tile  diocese  of  Kiidaire  and  Lerghhn.  [Motto  the  same  as  in  the  other,  ster- 
•otvped  Mid  printed  at  Dublin  by  the  same  printer,  A.  D.  1827.]     See.  p.  25. 

Q.  Say  the  ten  commandments  of  God. 

A.  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God;  thou  shalt  not  have  any  strange  gods  before  me. 
*11lon  ihalt  not  make  to  thyself  neither  an  idol  or  any  firure  to  adore  it. 

1.  ThoQ  shalt  not  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  thy  God  in  vain;  for  the  Lord 
will  not  hold  him  guiltless  that  shall  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  bis  God  in  vain. 

9.  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbor's  wife. 

It.  Thon  abalt  not  covet  tliv  neighbor's  goods.'* 

nil  iMiits  the  reprobaion  pronounced  on  the  preceding. 

Again:  here  is  an  American  catechism. — ^Yes,  in  ihis  land  ot 
liililes  has  been  published  a  catechism,  in  which  the  same  liberty  if 
talcen.    Its  title  is : 

"  An  abridgement  of  the  Christian  doctrine,  with  proofs  of  scripture 
01  points  controverted,  by  way  of  question  and  answer :  composed  in 
IWf  byMev.  Henry  Tuberville,  D.  D.  of  the  English  college  of 
Douay  :  Now  approved  and  recommended  for  his  diocese,  by  the  right 
Mev.  Benedict  bishop  of  Boston.  This  is  the  wav,  walk  ye  in  it** 
Isa.  xxz.  21.  New  York ;  published  by  John  Doyle;  No.  12.  Liber- 
ty ttiiffti  ttareotyped  by  A.  Chandler.  1833.*'  See  p.  54. 

**C|.  What  is  the  second  conmiandnient  ? 

A*  Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  thy  God  in  vain.** 

Is  fill  ike  ueond  eomfnandmeni?  Ilit  not  That  child  is  tauo^ht 
iilsehood,  which  is  taught  thus  to  learn  the  decalogue.  If  the  Roman 
hiiltojps  and  archbishops  in  Ireland  and  America,  in  this  our  day  can 
thns  impose  on  all  the  youth  in  the  Roman  commimion,  and  thus  per- 
vert ami  annul  one  of  God's  commandments,  to  make  way  for  the 
worshiping  of  images,  what  shall  we  say  of  the  morality  of  her  rule 
of  faith  in  this  and  other  matters  f 

II  is  a  poor  apology  for  this  expurgation  of  the  decalogue,  that  it  is 
not  so  done  in  the  Douay  bible :  for  when  these  catechisms  were  in- 
troduced, and  even  yet  in  most  Catholic  countries,  not  one  layman  in  a 
thousand  ever  read  that  bible :  the  catechism  intended  for  universal 
consumption  contained  all  his  knowledge  of  God's  law.  What  my- 
riaii%  then,  through  this  fraud,  must  have  lived  and  died  in  the  be- 
lief that  the  second  commandment  was  no  part  of  God's  law  !  It 
is  olesfly  proved,  that  the  pastors  of  the  church  have  struck  out  one 
of  God's  ten  words;  which  not  only  in  the  Old  Testament,  but  in  all 
revelation,  are  the  most  emphatically  regarded  as  the  synopsis  of  ali 
lelif  ion  and  morality.  They  have  also  made  a  ninth  commandment 
9nt  of  the  tenth,  and  theif  ninthy  in  that  independent  position,  be- 


SOMAN   CATHOLIC   BELIOIOlf. 


215 


eomes  identical  with  the  seventh  commandment,  and  makes  God  ns0 
a  tautology  in  the  only  instrument  in  the  universe  that  he  wrote  with 
his  own  hand !  But  why  this  annulling  of  the  second  commandment  1 
Because  it  is  a  positive  prohibition  of  the  practice  of  bowing  down 
to  images,  and  doing  them  homage ;  a  custom  dearer  to  the  Romish 
church  than  both  the  second  and  the  seventh  commandment !  It  is, 
hewever,  gross  idolatry.  So  far  at  least  as  the  i^orant  and  unedu- 
cated part  of  the  community  is  concerned ;  no  spiritual,  no  highly 
cultivated  mind  needs  such  aids  of  worship— nay,  they  would,  to 
such  persons,  be  hindrances  rather  than  aids  of  devotion.  But  the 
uneducated  and  sensual  mass,  which  are  in  that  community, — the  vast 
majority,  literally  adore  tlie  image,  and  delight  in  the  picture  more 
than  in  the  Creator.  And,  therefore,  the  abrogation  of  the  second 
commandment,  by  the  priests,  is  the  positive  introduction  of  idolatry. 
The  Hebrew  bible  says  and  all  versions  of  it  in  eflfect  say,  "  Thou 
shalt  not  make  unto  thyself  any  graven  image,  nor  the  likeness  of 
any  thing  in  heaven  above,  nor  in  the  earth  beneath.  Thou  shalt  not 
bow  down  to  them  nor  serve  them."  The  gentleman  made  as  hand- 
some and  eloquent  a  defence  of  the  practice  of  violating  this  solemn 
precept  as  could  be  well  imagined.  He  referred  us  to  the  tabernacle 
and  temple,  of  ancient  time  foil  of  types — patterns  of  things  in  hea- 
ven, Ac:  but  unfortunately  for  his  logic,  none  were  permitted  to  wor- 
ship these  patterns  of  ideas.  They  were  but  to  portray  the  things  to 
be  revealed  in  the  gospel  age — ^a  picture-book,  to  sketch  the  outlines 
of  that  redemption,  which  the  Messiah  wrought,  and  of  the  worship 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  They  never  presumed  to  worship  them, 
they  looked  through  these  outward  symbols,  or  signs  of  ideas,  to  the 
spiritual  substance  as  we  look  through  unfigurative  language  to  the 

sense.  '  ,    •  t         i.    • 

The  "  brazen  serpent,"*^  introduced  by  my  opponent,  had  the  authon 
ty  of  God,  for  its  being  made,  and  was  a  splendid  type  of  him  that 
destroyed  the  serpent,  that  old  serpent  the  devil,  who  had  bitten  the 
human  race.  When  men  bitten,  looked  at  it,  they  were  healed :  hut 
when  they  began  to  worship  it,  it  was  destroyed.  I  say,  it  had  the 
authority  of  God.  But  where  is  the  same  authority  for  carrying 
about  the  bones  of  a  dead  saint,  or  the  hair  of  the  Viram  Mary,  or 
the  feet  of  Balaam's  assi  Where  is  the  first  word,  m  favor  of  wor- 
shiping or  making  an  image  of  the  cross,  or  of  the  Savior,  or  of  any 
saint  I  or  of  venerating  a  grave,  a  relic,  or  a  picture  t 

My  opponent  ingeniously  asked,  if  the  name  of  God  were  not  a 
picture  1  Profound  reasoning  !  The  name  of  God  a  picture  of  the 
same  class  with  the  image  of  the  cross  and  of  the  Virgin !  But  a 
mother  says  to  her  infant,  "  my  life !"  and  she  may  say  to  Lady  Mary 
in  the  same  style,  "  my  life !"  Ingenious !  I  would  ask  this  Roman 
Catholic  lady  when  she  looks  upon  her  child,  and  exclaims  "  my  life, 
if  she  feels  the  same  religious  affections,  the  same  pious  emotions, 
as  when  she  looks  up  to  the  Vir^n  Mary  and  exclaims,  *' my  life?* 
Is  not  the  gentleman  rather  playing  the  sophist,  or  sporting  in  jest, 
than  gravely  reasoning  the  subject  1  Certainly,  he  would  not  so  teach 
his  congregation  in  the  absence  of  Protestants !  This  is  as  felicitous 
and  as  rhetorical  as  his  allusions  to  the  device  and  images  on  medals, 
or  on  gold  and  silver  coin.  There  is,  indeed,  idolatry  heie !  B« 
there  is  no  hypocrisy  in  the  temple  of  mammon.  Moreover,  these 
worshipers  adoi«  not  the  image  of  money ;  but  the  money  itself. 


I 


I 
I. 


I 


810 


DSBATX  Olf   THB 


Next  cane  the  disrabim.  What  ao  aefoelttioo  of  ideas !  What 
Mnfirion  in  the  mind  that  asaoclates  the  eherabini  in  Solomon's  tem- 
|ile»  with  the  image  on  a  dollar !  Is  the  gentleman  serious  I  Did  the 
]Mii|ile  fee  the  cherubim,  in  the  holiest  of  all  I  Aaron,  the  priest,  only 
stood  before  those  cherubim,  as  the  type  of  our  high  priest,  who  offers 
his  sacrifice  in  heaven :  and  Aaron  stood  there  only  once  in  a  year. 
If  he  understood  either  the  type  or  the  anti-type,  he  could  not  adduce 
it  either  for  the  wofship  of  an  image  or  the  offering  of  any  sacrifice  on 
earth :  for,  like  Aaron  m  the  holiest  of  all,  Christ  offers  his  sacrifice 
ira  heaven*  Aaron  presented  the  blood  upon  the  propitiatory :  but  Christ 
tntered  ome  for  aU,  As  the  bishop's  high  priest  is  not  in  heaven  but 
at  Rome ;  all  the  sacrifice  which  he  can  ofifer  on  earth  is  not  worth  a 
farthing:  for  in  the  Christian  and  Jewish  sense,  no  sacrifice  on  earth 
nan  at  ail  any  thing.  Such  were  the  types,  and  such,  certainly,  are  the 
tiH-tifea.  Offerings  for  sin,  now,  are  only  made  in  heaven.  Ttie 
Wiy  aiitiaion  to  Aaron,  strikes  a  blow  at  the  priesthood  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  ehurch,  as  if  God  had  not  accepted  in  heaven,  the  sacrifice  of 
his  Son,  and  called  for  their  assistance! ! 

But  it  is  hinted  that  I  should  more  fully  prove  the  immorality  of  the 
Bomaii  Catholic  rule  of  laith.  I  have  no  lack  of  documents  on  this 
ttlject.  The  saint  Ligori,  by  the  help  of  saint  Pius  VII.  has  richly 
firaished  us  with  indabitable  authority.  "The  attorney  general  of  the 
d«vil  lives  at  Rome,"  says  my  opponent,  **and  prevents  the  beatifical 
tion  of  all  saints."  Hciw  great,  then,  must  have  been  the  virtues  of 
St.  Ligori,  who,  in  spite  of  the  devil,  was  canonized  hy  pope  Pius 
¥11 1 !  See  how  equivocation  is  taught  in  this  rule  of  faith  and  mcF 
nlitv  :•»■ 

*  T9  ■wear,**  mji  St.  Lif  ori,  **  with  •guivocation,  where  there  is  a  good  rm 
fOfi,  and  eqaivocBtioa  itself  is  lawful,  is  not  wronj^.     And  If  a  {lenon  tweart 
without  a  rood  reason,  it  i*  not  to  be  considered  a  penury;  since,  in  one  sense 
0f  the  word,  and  according  to  mental  restriction,  he  swears  what  is  true."    Li- 
gor.  Lib.  iii.  N.  151.     [Synopsis,  159. 

Dissimulation  is  variously  taught. 
—  **  It  is  lawful/'  continuei  Ligori,  **  for  a  Catholic,  when  he 

if  poning  through  a  countiy  belonfi^ng  to  heretics,  and  is  in  danger  of  losing  his 
life  or  property,  to  pretend  that  he  is  not  a  Catholic,  and  to  eat  meat  on  fast 
daji.**    Id.  Lid.  ii.  N.  15.    [Synopsis,  p.  216. 

This  new  old  rule  of  faith  has  made  some  new  sins,  which  neither 
patriaichs  nor  Jews  did  ever  commit ;  and  here  is  one  of  that  class 
which  no  American  can  ever  commit : 

**  Is  it  a  mortal  sin,"  asks  the  saint,  to  steal  a«ifia/l  piece  of  a  sacred  relic?  Ana. 
**  There  it  no  donbt,  hot  that,  in  the  district  of  Rome,  it  it  m  mortal  sin.  But  ont 
of  thtt  diitrkt,  if  any  one  steal  a  small  piece  of  a  relic.  It  it  probable  that  it  it 
no  mortal  sin,  provided  the  relic  be  not  thereby  disgraced,  nor.  its  value  less- 
•iMd;  unless  it  be  some  notable  or  rare  relic,  mch  for  instance,  as  the  Hnly 
Croit,  or  the  hair  ofthe  blessed  Virgin  Mary,"  Iec.    Id.  ib.  N.  532.    [Syoopsit 

p.  107. 

There  is  a  secret  on  the  subject  of  infallibility^  which  the  saint  Li- 
gori has  begun  to  divulge.  Custom,  it  would  seem,  since  general 
coiincils  are  gone  out  of  lashion,  is  from  this  time  forth  to  be  the 
standard  of  orthodoxy  and  infallibility ;  at  least,  in  morals.  Listen 
to  the  moral  theology  of  the  Romish  church  on  this  point : 

••Custom."  says  the  saint.  "  ift  defined  tht-  unwritten  law.  In  order  that  custom 
should  obtain  the  force  and  obligation  of  law,  three  thingt  are  required.  1st. 
That  it  be  Introduced  not  by  any  particular  person,  but  by  a  community,  or  at 
least,  by  the  majority  of  •  community,  which  is  capable  of  making  laws,  al- 
though, in  lact,  laid  comDiinity  cannot  make  the  lawt.     Sodly.  It  it  required 


lOMAN   CATnOLIC    RELIGION. 


217 


„J  Vhonld  be  reMOoable."  Custom  hat  a  threefeld  state.  lathe 
tnamg  all  those  pertont  who  introduce  a  custom  contrary  to  iuw,  sin.  In 
proccM  of  tiiite.  those  who  follow  a  custom  that  has  already  been  introdoced 
bf  tlieir  ancestors,  do  not  consmit  a  sin  in  following  the  custom,  but  they  can  be 
pufliahed  for  it  by  the  prince.  In  fine,  those  who  follow  a  custom  after  it  has 
become  a  rule,  neither  sin,  nor  can  they  be  punished  for  it."    Id.  ib.  N.  107. 

"TlUt    TIMB    Rfi^UI&KD    ACCORDING    TO    THE    CANOKS    OF   THE    ROMISR 

CHURCH,  ft)tt  A  CUSTOM  TO  BECOME  A  LAW.     Ill  order  that  custom  should 
obtain  the  force  and  obligation  of  law,  it  it  required, 

"  3dly,"  continues  the  saint,  "  that  it  should  continue  a  long  tirae  with  re- 
peated acts.  In  regard  to  the  time  that  is  suflicieot  to  render  a  custom  lawful, 
one  opinion  is,  that  it  is  to  be  left  to  the  judgment  of  the  prudent,  according  to 
the  repetition  ofthe  acts,  and  the  quality  of  the  matter.  .The  second  opinionis, 
Ihttt  tea  years  are  required,  and  are  tolbcient;  for  thit  it  the  length  of  time  re- 
quired for  the  introducing  and  l^galiiing  of  a  custom  br  the  canonical  law,  an- 
■eat  it  be  in  tome  place  wberf  the  contrary  it  sanctioned/*  Id.  ib.  lib.  i.  N.  107. 

7  Syuopsii,  p.  183.  .     «      ■,         - 

••  Merchandizing,  and  the  telling  of  goods  at  auction  on  the  Sundayt,  it,  on 
•cc3unt  of  its  being  the  general  custom,  altogether  lawful.  Buying  and  wiling 
goods  on  the  Lord's  day  and  on  festival  days  are  certainly  forbidden  by  the  can- 
onical law,  but  where  the  contrary  custoiu  prevails,  it  is  excusable."  Id.  ib.  N.  286, 

"  He  who  makes  use  of  the  knavery  and  cunning,"  says  the  saint,  •*  which  it 
usually  practised  in  gambling,  and  which  has  the  Anction  of  custom,  is  not 
bound  to  restore  what  he  wins,  since  both  parties  know  that  such  tricks  arc  eus- 
t>mafy,  and  consequently  they  consent  to  them."     Id.  ib.  N.  882. 

Gambling  consecrated  for  priests  and  people  by  the  law  of  custom : 

*'  We  will  now  show,  however,  the  canonM  to  toe  contrary,  notwithstanding, 
that  all  sorts  of  gambling  are  allowed.  This  we  prove  from  Ligori  s  own  con- 
cessions. He  teaches  as  follows;—"  The  canons,"  says  he  ♦••  which  forbid  garnet 
of  hazard  do  not  appear  to  be  received  except  inasmuch  as  the  gambling 
Is  carried  on  with  the  danger  of  scandal.  Be  It  known,"  continues  he,  "  that  the 
above  mentioned  canonical  law  is  so  much  nullified  by  the  contrary  custom,  that 
not  only  laymen,  but  even  the  clergy  do  not  sin,  if  they  play  cards  principally 
for  the  sake  of  recreation,  andjor  a  moderate  sum  of  money.**  Id.  ib.  Ii.  88* 
[Synopsis,  p.  235. 

A  new  way  of  sanctifying  the  sabbath : 

•*  Bull  nCHTS  and  plays  aluowkd.  "On  the  entrance  of  a  prince  or  no- 
bleman into  a  city,  it  u  lawful  on  a  Sunday  to  prepare  the  drapery,  arraage  the 
theatre,  Ac.,  and 'to  act  a  comedy,  also  to  exhibit  the  bull-lights;  the  reason  is, 
because  such  marks  of  joy  are  morally  necessary  for  the  public  weal."  Id.  ib. 
Jl.  304.    [Synopsis,  p.  193.  '       ,  ,      ,  ,  .      . 

The  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  manners  makes  it  even  lawful  to  stn : 

••  It  it  lawful,'*  says  Ligori,  •*  to  induce  a  person  to  commit  a  smaller  sio,  in  or- 
der to  avoid  one  that  is  greater."    Id.  N.  77.    [Synopsis,  p.  255. 

•*  Let  the  confessor,"  says  the  saint,  ••  enjoin  upon  those  scrupulous,  who  are 
afraid  of  sin  in  every  action,  that  they  act  treely,  despise  their  scruples,  and  do 
contrary  to  what  they  dictate,  where  tin  b  not  evident    [Synopsis,  p.  173. 

This  law  licenses  drunkenness : 

••  It  is  no  sin  to  get  drunk,  by  the  advice  of  a  physician,  if  oiie*t  health  ctnnol 
elherwise  be  restored."     Id.  N.  76.     [Synopsis,  p.  254. 

Hence  drunkards  may  be  acceptable  communicants ! 

••  It  is  lawful,"  says  Ligori,  "  to  administer  the  sacraments  to  draakmrda»  if 
tiicy  are  in  the  probable  danger  of  death,  and  had  previoutly  the  intention  of 
ivceiving  them.'*    Ligor.  vi.  N.  81.     [Syoopsit,  p.  260. 

If  norance  is  the  mother  of  devotion,  even  yet : 

The  sin.ner  must  be  left  in  ionorajice.— The  doctrine  is  at  foUowt:  (I 
take  it  from  the  saint  verbatim.)  **  If  the  penitent  ftays  he,)  is  in  iisea^M 
ignorance,  in  regard  to  those  things  concerning  which,  it  is  possible  to  be  invin- 
3bly  ignorant,  although  this  ignorance  be  of  the  •  law  of  God,*  and  the  confessor 
prudently  thinks  that  to  admoninh  the  penitent  would  uot  correct  him.  then,  and 
ta  that  rase,  the  confessor  must  abstain  from  admonishing  the  peniieat,and  niutC 
loave  him  in  his  ignorance."     Id.  ib.  *    .  • 

Heretics  are  still  to  be  punished,  not  only  hy  virtue  of  the  general 

T  28 


i 


2  IB  wniATB  o?f  Tirs 

•«p.iieil  of  Lalfiiii,,  A.  H.  13 1&,  whicli  tajs,  **  L«t  iSIm  Menlar  pownn 
lit'.  'CiMi]itlM,  if  naoetMry,  to  mdmwmimit,  io  tMr  itaott  power,  all 
Mm^amimm^md  by  the  ehnreh :'*  but  aceordin^  to  tba  moral  tiMology* 
as  reported  by  the  fmint 

H£ilEncs  "TO  BE  PC MSiiCD.—**  A  bishop  is  bound/*  tiiyi  Benedict  XIV. «  erra 
injiliciifwhttfffcthe  tribunaJ  of  the  holy  inquisitum  is  in  force,  nedDloii^ly  and  car«- 
iWf  to  piii^  the  dvicete  that  is  coiiiiiiitted  to  bis  cart-,  fruiii  bi:rettcs;  an:i,  if  h« 
indany  of  them,  he  ought  to  punnh  them  accortiiiig  to  the  ranons;  he  nhould 
however,  be  canti^as,  nut  to  hinder  the  in^tisitora  ^  the  faith  from  doinr  their 
dut?/'    Lijpor.  Kp.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  378.    [Svnopis,  p.  294. 

From  the  influence  of  all  these  laws,  why  should  it  ba  tfaoaght 
BUyiifi  that  the  clergy  are  exceedingly  corrupt  I    Listen  to  the  saint : 

How  wmmj  relapMuc  tiiuert  are  involved  in  eternal  ruin  by  fulk>wiar  lh« 
dii«ctioni  of  bad  coaFeatort!  •*The  saint  hai  told  us,  that,  AMONf;  TH£ 
FHIESTS,  WHO  LIVE  IN  THE  WORLD.  IT  IS  RARE,  AND  VERY 
RARE,  TO  FIND  ANY  THAT  ARE  GOOD."    [Sviiopsit,  p.  18U. 

Yet  a«sooniinf  to  these  assumptions,  under  the  sanction  of  Christ, 
all  are  bound  to  bear  them  on  peril  of  damnation :  for,  **  he  that  liearw 
etb  you,  beareth  me ;  and  he  that  despiseth  you,  despiseth  me :  and  he 
that  despiseth  me,  despiseth  him  that  sent  me."  So,  to  despise  these 
priests,  is  to  despise  Ood ! 

Once  more,  from  Li^ri,  and  I  shall  have  fiven  almost  a  specimen 
of  the  immorality  and  impiety  of  the  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  faith,  on 
fiMtal  points  of  religion  and  morality.  There  is  no  one  subject  on 
wiiih  we  could  be  more  copious  than  this  one :  but  from  respect  to  our 
fiifenee  we  shall  give  but  the  remotest  hint. 

••A  biibop,  however  poor  he  may  be,  cannot  appropriate  to  himself  pecuniart 
ilMf  without  the  license  of  the  apostolical  see.  Bat  he  ought  to  apply  them  to 
pioai  uses,  which  the  emncU  of  jVchI  has  kid  apou  non-resident  clergymen,  or 
upon  thoae  ckf^ymm  who  kitp  tmem"  Ligor.  Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444  [Synop- 
«a,D.  294-  or-  r  t  j     f" 

Wow,  if  a  priest  should  keep  a  meee^  it  is  a  very  expiable  and  tri- 
fling oflTence;  but  should  he  marry  a  wife,  he  must  be  excommunica- 
ted foiaver!  Thua  the  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  faith  treats  the  Bible, 
and  annuls,  at  pleasure,  every  law  and  institution  of  heaven  !  Have  I 
not,  them,  my  reanected  auditors,  fuUv  proved  the  falUhility  and  im- 
moral tendency  of  the  doctrine  and  rule  of  faith,  of  the  bisliop's  church 
*-to  aay  nothing  of  that  ayatom  upon  the  clergy  themaelvea,  who  ex- 
fMad  and  inculcate  it! 

One  word,  before  I  sit  down,  on  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  Greek 
and  Latin  fathers.  I  have  said  before,  and  I  repeat  it,  if  they  agree 
m  any  two  points,  thev  are,  in  giving  testimony  to  the  scriptures,  and 
liat  it  is  the  duty  of  all  to  read  them.  So  far  they  are  all  Proteatantt 
pd  lot  Roman  Catholic^— [Time  ezpired.]^ 


SOMAN   CIATHOUC    BBUOIOlf 


210 


Muff  pmi  4  o^ekdkf  F^  M 

QlBllOP  PURCEIX  rises — 

The  extract  from  Chillingworth  will  be  viewed  by  men  of  Intelli- 
■Mice,  as  one  of  the  strongest  arguments  advanced  in  this  debale  on 
tllfl  Catholic  side  of  the  question.  And  it  may  be  as  well  to  observe, 
tlict  my  friend  baa  probably  first  seen  it  in  the  Catholic  work,  the 
Alititeble  Diacussion,  from  which  he  baa  quoted.  Chillingworth  was 
diifingniahed  aa  a  coutroveralalbt.  He  bad  a  public  disputation,  like 
tli  piaaent,  witb  wnne  Jeauits,  by  whom  he  was  not  only  defeated 
bat  convertMi  to  the  Catholic  faith.  But  yielding,  like  Gibbon,  to  tha 
aolicitatiou  of  friends,  the  importunities,  the  livings  presenttid  to  him, 


or  to  wbacb  lie  win  pieaented,  by  Land,  aiehbiahop  of  London,  lie  re» 
eanlad,  and  finally,  aa  it  is  on  good  groanda  aaaartod,  he  died  a  Jew. 
Tha  only  apology  he  could  offer  for  his  versatility  was,  that  he  found 
every  one  of  these  religions  in  the  bible — it  was  tiie  onljr  resting  place 
for  me  m*k*  cf  kufeeU^thAi  is  to  aay,  he  trampled  upon  it,  to  Bubserve 
the  purposes  of  base,  worldly  interest  \  But  I  have  now,  thank  God, 
aometlung  more  tangible  to  offer  in  the  way  of  protf,  that  nothing 
can  be  conceived  more  inexcusably  unfair,  than  the  arguments  em- 
ployed against  the  Catholic  religion*  I  now  pledge  myself  to  shew 
to  overy  man  of  honor  in  this  city,  that  the  last  allegation  read  by 
the  gentleman,  purporting  to  be  from  the  works  of  Liguori,  is  not  to 
be  found  in  the  works  ot  that  writer.  It  is  all  a  base  fabrication,  I 
will  not  say  of  Mr.  C. ;  but  of  MomAody.  I  will  meet  this  charge 
with  a  complete  and  an  overwhelming  refutation.  We  have  now 
come  to  an  important  crisis  in  this  debate.  My  worthy  opponent  re- 
duced to  the  desperation  of  defeat,  like  a  drowning  man,  is  induced 
to  grasp  at  anything  and  to  resort  to  abuse.  But  this  will  not  sustain 
him.  He  cannot  now  quote  from  Du  Pin,  or  send  his  readers  back  to 
the  dark  ages,  and  draw  a  grossly  exaggerated  picture  of  the  personal 
frailties  of  a  few  popes  and  then  ask  if  there  can  be  a  drop  of  apostolic 
grace  in  the  whole  world.  I  have  three  editions  of  the  complete 
works  of  Liguori,  in  mv  library,  or  in  this  city,  to  refer  to ;  and  in 
none  of  tliem  can  this  irife  doctrine  be  found.  Mark,  then,  the  pro- 
position, my  friends.  It  is  this.  That  priests  are  allowed  to  keep 
mistresses,  upon  pavment  of  a  fine,  but  that,  if  they  marry,  they  are 
sxoommunicated  !  1  new  call  upon  Charles  Hammond,  Esq.  Judge 
Hall,  General  Harrison,  Judge  Este,  Judge  Wright,  or  anv  other  five 
equally  learned  and  honorable  citizens  of  Cincinnati<-»for  1  only  men- 
tioned the  first  that  came  to  my  mind — to  decide  this  issue  of  fact. 
1  pronounce  the  whole  char^  a  base,  unfounded  assertion,  and  I  again 
thank  Heaven,  that  I  am  m  a  city,  where  justice  will  be  done  to 
the  truth,  and  where  falsehood  will  be  triumphantly  defeated. 

The  volume  from  which  the  gentleman  has  been  all  day  reading,  ii 
one  of  those  books  of  abomination  and  falsehood ;  (>ut  forth,  in  the 
city  of  New  York,  by  Smitli,  Slocumand  Co.  and  it  is  a  fair  specimen 
of  their  fashion  of  circulating  truth.  Does  it  not  furnish  strong  pre- 
sumption to  the  reflecting  mind,  that  there  must  be  something  divine 
in  the  religion  which  such  men  and  women  combine  to  abuse  1  It 
was  the  monster  Nero,  notorious  for  parricide  and  lust,  who  first  drew 
the  sword  against  the  christian  religion.  Forget  not  then,  I  pray  you, 
my  friends,  the  proposition  that  is  before  us.  I  am  determined  not  to 
alumher  or  sleep  on  this  matter,  but  to  probe  it  thoroughly  and  ez- 
poee  its  rottenness  to  the  world.  Mr.  Campbell^s  allegation  against 
the  Catholic  church,  is  that  Liguori,  a  standard  moralbt  in  that 
church,  teaches,  that  prie»i*  may  keep  eoneuhinest  by  paying  a  ^ae,  bui 
thai  if  ikey  marr^f  they  must  be  excommunieaied,  VV  hereas  1  distinctly 
deny  that  Liguon  has  ever  taught  any  thing  so  abominable,  and  that 
all  who  say  so,  are  guilty  of  a  most  flagrant  violation  of  the  command- 
ment of  our  God,  wiiich  aavs  "Tnou  shalt  mot  beaji  false  witksmi 

AOAINST  THY  KTBIGHBOa."    Exod.  XX.  16. 

The  charge  of  suppressing  the  2nd  commandment,  while  proof  to  tlie 
contrary,  from  the  Catholic  catechisms  every  where  in  use  in  the  U.  S« 
and  from  every  Catholic  bible  in  the  world,  was  staring  him  ia  the  face, 
may  be  placed  along  side  of  the  foregoing  I    Add  to  these,  the  hardi- 


I, 

t 

I 


I' 


I 


I' 


DSflATS  'Olf  THB 

llocNi  witfi  wliieli  tli«  pliiiwflt  wofds  of  the  Redeemer,  tlie  enphatici 
ieelarmtiofi  of  St«  Piiii,  md  t)ie  hia^fiest  eulogy  of  Urn  Aptlaajfm 
Hi  lira  tuperior  itiielity  of  the  unmarried  state,  frnwe  been  violentlj 
tortured  oj  my  opponent,  and  a  fair  estimate  may  be  made  of  tho  re* 
spect  he  entertains  for  the  bible.  Even  his  jests  are  but  little  help  to 
Ills  afgninent,  for  error  was  never  senoinely  wittv.  And  when  he  af« 
fecm  to  lanf  h  at  St.  Paul  for  his  (laYing  been  a  bachelor,  I  shall  coii« 
teHt  imyieirwith  replying,  yes !  St.  Paul  was  a  bachelor :  but  would 
he  not  have  looked  well,  with  sevei  little  squealing  children  trottinff 
aller  him,  mniing  the  ekureka  of  Asia !  llie  remark  of  St  Paul, 
**  have  I  not  a  ri^t  to  lead  about  a  sister  !*'  has  reference  to  the  prac- 
tice then  eaily  introduced,  of  entrusting  in  some  cases,  the  instruction 
of  imialM,  tn  petaons  of  their  own  lex,  and  to  the  greater  facilities  af 
fefdM  ia  this  lesiiect,  to  the  apostles  and  preachers  of  Christianity,  to 
convey  the  knowledge  of  true  religion  to  promiscuous  society,  wheth- 
er Jewish  or  Pigae.  I  consider  marria^  a  holv,  nay,  a  divine  insti- 
tution. I  respect  the  sanctity  of  the  union,  and  pay  a  willing  tribute 
of  praise  to  the  eminent  virtue  of  persons  engaged  in  that  state ;  hut 
1  Biiist  reason  and  judge  with  Christ  and  St.  Paul,  that  if,  **•  he  who 
maniet  does  well,  he  who  does  not  does  better.'*  A  priest  assumes 
tie  ohlfgation  of  celibacy,  at  mature  age,  and  voluntarily.  God's 
grace  is  sufficient  for  him,  as  it  was  for  St.  Paul,  and  his  virtuous 
atmggles  against  the  evil  spirit,  that  dared  to  tempt  even  the  Savior, 
in  the  desert,  and  Paul,  who  had  been  rapt  up  even  to  the  third  hea- 
ven, can  make  mrtueperfed  in  infirmity,  without  the  priest's  being  as 
foolish  as  the  thief,  who  cut  off  his  hands,  to  keep  himself  from  steal- 
ing. I  hope  however  that  my  opponent,  or  his  auxiliary.  Smith,  will 
mot  be  templed  to  cut  off  kh  hands,  for  stealing  from  Liguori,  what 
is  better  to  any  man  than  trashy  gold,  kia  good  name.  One  word 
■ore.  If  marriage  were  aa  pleasing  in  the  sight  of  God,  as  celibacy, 
*hy  did  God  and  St.  Paul  direct  abstinence  from  marriage  privileges 
as  a  preDaration  for  seasons  of  greater  devotion  1  According  to  my 
fHend,  should  they  not  have  commanded  the  contrary ! 

I  pass^  in  the  next  nlace,  to  relies.  The  chair  in  which  the  signers 
ef  the  declaration  of  Independence  sat,  the  pen  with  which  they  wrote 
iie  ipeffimis  document,  a  bit  of  the  wood  of  the  tree  overshadowing 
lie  grave  of  the  illustrious  Washington,  are  all  treated  with  respect, 
aiid  sought  for  with  avidity :  shall  religious  memorials  alone  be  trea- 
ted contemptuously  I  What  says  the  scripture,  Acts.  xix.  11.  Jlnd 
&od  wrougki  by  ike  hand  ff  Paul  more  than  eammon  miraeie»,  m  thai 
esefi  ihm  were  brought frrnn  Ati  body  to  the  »icA,  handkerehids^  and  aprom^ 
mad  lAe  iliseiises  departed  from  ^m^  and  the  wicked  spirtts  went  out  tf 
Him.  **  Tie  woman,  troubled  twelve  years,  with  an  issue  of  blood, 
•iM  wfliin  heiaelf,  «Mf  I  shall  touch  only  his  garment,  I  shall  be 
iiealed,"  and  $he  was  heakdt  and  JetuM  turning  and  seeing  her  taidt  Be 
efgmd heart  daughter,  %/Mili  lurA  wmde  thee  whole.''  Evm  untk.uifaiik 
or  consciousness,  there  is  a  miraculous  cure  recorded  in  IV  Kings  xiii. 
f  1.  •*  Md  Eii$eua  died  and  they  buried  him.  Jnd  the  Movert  from 
JftoA  enwae  into  lAe  land,  tAe  mam  year.  Jlnd  tome  thai  were  burying  a 
Man,  mm  lie  JZovert  and  eati  tki  body  into  ike  i^mlehre  tf  Eliiem.  JSnd 
Mxleti  he  had  touched  the  boneg  ff  Ehmus,  the  man  eame  to  life,  and  ttood 
tipofi  Mb  feel,'*  I  have  no  doubt  that  these  texts  have  never  been  read, 
m:  at  least  reiected  on,  by  learned  Protestants,  like  my  friend,  who 
riiiifNiIe  Catholics  in  the  pious  simplicity  of  their  souls,  for  venerating 


SOMAN  OATUOmC    XBIilOION. 


sm 


dead  menU  bone».  If  the  corpse  of  a  prophet  who  had  never  seen  !•> 
sus  Christ,  could  impart  such  a  miraculous  virtue,  as  to  resuscitate 
the  dead,  why  is  it  considered  absurd  to  invoke  the  prayers  of  th% 
living  and  beatified  spirit  that  knew  and  loved,  and  watched  over  the 
Savior  on  earth,  and  that  now  reigns  gloriously  with  him  in  heaven  1 
If  Eliseus  was  good,  was  not  Mary  good  I  If  the  prophet  of  the  Sa- 
vior had  so  much  power,  had  the  mother  of  the  Savior  none  1  Havt* 
ing  now  disposed  of  celibacy  and  relics,  I  resume  the  subject  of  ceK 
fession. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  vindicate  the  scriptural  origin,  the  moral 
tendency  and  the  immense  benefits  conferred  on  society  by  the  theory 
and  practice  of  the  sacrament  of  penance,  as  held  in  the  Catholic 
church,  from  the  weighty  charges  preferred  against  it  by  my  oppo- 
nent. On  this  subject  the  council  of  Trent,  ch.  vi.  teaches:  "  the  penance 
of  a  christian  arler  his  fall  (from  the  grace  of  baptism)  is  very  different 
from  that  of  baptism,  and  consists,  not  only  in  refraining  from  sins, 
anh  a  detestation  of  them,  namely,  a  contrite  and  humble  heart,  but 
also  in  a  sacramental  confession  of  them,  at  least  in  desire  and  at  a 
propel  time,  and  the  priestly  absolution;  and,  likewise,  in  satisfac- 
tion, hy  fasting,  alms,  prayers,  and  other  pious  exercises  of  a  spiritual 
life ;  not,  indeed,  for  the  eternal  punishment,  which,  together  with  the 
crime,  is  remitted  in  tlie  sacrament,  or  by  the  desire  of  the  sacrament, 
but  for  the  temporal  punishment,  which  the  scripture  teaches  is  not 
always  wholly  remitted  as  in  baptism."  Such  is,  and  ever  has  been, 
the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  church,  which  thus  ascribes  the  whole 
glory  of  man's  justification  to  God,  through  Jesus  Christ,  our  only 
Savior.  She  teaches  that  God  alone  can  forgive  sin,  and  that  without 
sincere  sorrow,  which  induces  us  to  detest  sin  more  than  all  other 
evils  together,  the  words  of  absolution  would  be  a  mockery  ;  and  this 
sorrow  may  be  called  contrition,  or  attrition,  the  name  matters  little  ; 
it  must  be  true,  interior,  preter^natural,  universal,  sovereign ;  that  is  to 
say,  it  must  come  from  the  heart,  and  from  a  motive  suggested  by 
faith ;  it  must  extend  to  all  sins  without  exception,  and  be  accompa- 
nied by  a  sincere  resolution  to  suffer  every  evil,  even  death  itself,  raider 
than  offend  God  any  more.  This  is  the  only  idea  of  penance,  as  a 
sacrament,  inculcated  by  the  Catholic  church,  and  from  this,  it  a^ 
pears,  how  horrid  is  the  guilt  of  our  calumniators,  who,  when  they^ 
find  us  otherwise  invulnerable,  assail  us  with  the  poisonous  shaf^  of 
slander  and  misrepresentation,  pretending,  while  they  know  full  well 
how  sincerely  we  reprobate  the  doctrine  they  impute  to  us,  that  the 
pope  grants  licence  to  commit  sin,  and  that  priests  for^ve  it  for  money ! 

The  power  of  the  priests  to  absolve  the  contrite  sinner,  is  based  on 
the  texts,  John  xx.  Matthew  xvi.  where  Christ  gives  the  keys  of  heat 
ven  to  Peter,  and  Ch.  xviii.  13,  when  he  declares  to  ail  the  apostles^  after 
breathing  on  them,  and  giving  them  the  Holy  Ghost,  **  Verily  I  say  unto 
you,  what  meter  ye  shall  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  in  heaven,  and 
whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  By  these 
words  we  consider  the  priest  vested  with  a  judicial  power  by  Jesus 
Christ,  to  bind  or  to  loose  from  sin ;  and  as  this  power  cannot  be  ex- 
ercised without  a  knowledge  of  the  sinner's  dispositions,  especially  aa 
to  his  sorrow  for  past  sins,  and  his  sincere  resolution  to  refrain  from 
them  in  future,  which  knowledge  none  but  the  sinner  himself  can 
give,  we  conclude  on  the  necessity  of  sacramental  confession  to  the 
the  priest,  who  holds  the  plane  of  Christ  in  the  spiritual  tribunal. 
T8 


HEIIATB   ON   Till 


m 


i«  10  immonlitf  in  this  belief;  on  the  eonlrair,  the  mont  in 
nknlahle  beneits  hftt e  accrued  from  it  to  reli^on  and  to  society.  Il 
iny  friend  say  that  it  is  impioas  to  ascribe  to  man  a  power  which  be- 
longs to  God  alone,  I  answer,  that  if  God  choose  to  give  snch  power 
to  Marat  it  would  be  impious  in  man  to  deny  such  power  to  God,  and 
B  ffrlOTOUs  sin  of  disobedience,  to  refuse  to  use  it.  If  he  persist  in 
ttyiiig,  that  man  cannot  be  empowered  by  God  to  forgive  sin  in  the 
iiOtament  of  penance,  I  will  aslc  him,  why  then  is  man  empowered 
to  foicifo  iin  in  the  sacrament  of  baptism!  I  ask,  why  does  he 
Micrel  with  Catholics  for  employing  the  words — ^**1  absolve  thee 
Inmi  thj sins/'  when  Episcopalians  do  the  samel  Here  is  the  church 
of  Eoglftiid  book  of  common  prayer ;  and  in  it,  I  read  as  follows : 
**  When  the  minister  visits  any  sick  person,  the  latter  should  be  moved 
lo  make  a  tpedai  tmfanon  at  Mb  ttm,  tf  he  ftth  hit  enmdenee  trouhled 
tiM  ofiv  weigMijf  matter  t  mer  which  emtfemmh,  the  pnegi  ^alt  absofve 
llil%  ffhe  humbly  and  heartily  desire  it,  afier  this  murtt  **  Our  LordJetu* 
€krui,  who  kaih  kfl  power  to  his  churchy  to  absolve  all  sinners  who  truly 
rt§mii  and  'Miem  in  Mm,  tf  his  great  mercy,  ftn-give  thee  thine  offences, 
mndby  Ms  amthmiiyeommitiitd  to  me,  I  absolte  ti:ee  rioM  aix  Tnr  sms, 
ifi  the  name  tf  the  fhiher,  and  tf  the  Son,  and  (f  the  Molv  Ghost,**  Jmen. 
Soon  aHer  king  James  I.  presented  to  the  world,  in  his  own  person, 
the  anomaly  of  head  and  member  of  the  English  church,  and  lord  spi- 
ritual and  temporal  of  the  realm,  he  asked  his  prelates  at  Hampton 
«oiirt,  what  tnthority  this  church  claimed  in  the  article  of  ahsohdion 
fimm  mnf  (Mark--the  new  Peter  did  not  know  his  powers !)  Arch- 
Htio|l  Whitgift  began  to  bambooxle  him  with  an  account  of  the  gene- 
ral confession  and  absolution  in  the  communion  service;  with  which 
the  klof  being  dissatisfied,  Bancroft  bishop  of  London,  fell  on  his  knees 
•nd  said,  *'  It  becomes  us  to  deal  nlainly  with  your  majesty ;  there  is, 
also,  in  the  book,  a  more  particular  and  personal  absolution  in  the 
visitinf  of  file  sick.  Not  only  the  confessions  of  Augsburgh,  Bohemia, 
and  Saxony,  retain  and  allow  it,  but  also  Mr.  Caltiit  doth  approve 
both  such  a  general  and  snob  mprivaie  eorfesston  and  ahsoluiitm,'*'*  **  I 
•aneodingly  well  approve  it,  replied  his  maMy^  it  being  an  apostolical 
■nijfodly  ofdinance.**  Bancroft  was  right  in  quoting  the  Augsburgh 
Mil&sion,  lor  the  Lutherans,  the  real  Simon  Pure  of  the  reformation, 
in  the  oonliMsion  of  faith,  and  apology  for  that  confession,  expressly 
teach,  **  thai  absolution  is  no  kss  a  smramerd  than  baptism  and  the  Lor^s 
mppert  thai  particular  absoluiion  is  io  be  retained  in  eotifession,  that  to 
«i^iel  ii  is  the  error  cf  the  Nucatian  heretics  {  and  that  by  the  power  of  the 
J%t,  i^  ore  temittA^  mi  only  in  the  sight  of  the  ehurm,  but  in  the  sight 
ef  God,**  Luther  himaelf,  in  hit  cateeMsm,  required,  ihai  ike  pemteni  in 
eorfession  should  expressly  deefem  thai  ko  heHeoes  **  the  forgioemat  of  the 
pried  io  be  the  forgiveness  of  God,** 

On  this  topic,  before  taking  up  the  Toluminont  eridence  before  me 
iir  the  doctrine  of  the  Episcopallani,  on  this  side  the  great  water,  I 
lirast  produce  evidence,  not  to  be  contradicted  by  the  champion  of  all 
Protestantism.  It  is  that  of  the  redoubted  Chulingworth.  Treating 
3f  the  text,  John  xx.  23,  3,  he  asks  :  *•  CSoiii  any  man  be  so  unreason- 
able as  to  imagine,  that  when  our  Savior,  in  so  sokmn  a  manner,  having 
fit^  breamed  upon  his  dim'p!eSf,therdiy  conveying  and  insinuating  the 
noly  Ghosi  into  their  hearts,  renewed  unto  them,  or  rather  confirmeS  thai 
g*onmm  e&mmimon^  whereby  he  dekgaled  io  them  an  uuihonly  if  bind 


lOXAH  CATHOLIC   BELtOION. 


iMV'MlfUP 


Jng  and  loosing  sins  iipoti  mr^  eon  any  one  think,  I  say,  so  unwortMlf 
tf  our  Savior,  as  to  esteem  ihae  words  of  his  for  no  better  than  eomph" 
meni?  Therrfore,  in  obedience  to  his  gracious  will,  and  as  I  am  vmr* 
ranted  and  enjoined  by  my  holy  mother,  the  church  (f  England^  {you  see 
Protestants  use  the  style  *holy  mother  church'*  as  well  as  Catholics)  Ibt 
teeth  you  that  by  your  practice  and  use,  you  will  not  suffer  that  commis- 
sion wMch  Christ  hafh  given  to  his  ministers,  to  be  a  vain  form  of  words, 
\oithout  any  sense  under  them.     When  you  find  yourselves  charged  and 

rressed,  have  recourse  to  your  spiritual  physician,  and  freely  disclose 
nature  and  malignity  tf  your  disease.  And  come  not  to  him  only 
mi0i  such  a  mind  as  you  would  go  to  a  learned  man,  as  one  that  can 
^ieak  comfortable  things  to  yott  ,•  but  as  to  one  thai  hath  authority,  dele- 
gated  to  him  from  God  himsef,  to  absolve  and  ac^it  ytiu  tf  your  sins. 
If  ymt  shall  do  this,  assure  your  souh,  that  the  understanding  if  men,  is 
wU  able  to  cotteeive  the  transport,  and  excess  tf  joy  and  comfort,  which 
shall  accrue  to  thai  man*s  heart,  who  is  persuaded  he  hath  been  made  par' 
taker  if  this  blcssiufr** 

An  accredited  writer  in  the  New  York  Churchman,  of  the  7th  Jan. 
one  of  the  ablest  periodicals  in  the  United  States,  quotes  the  most 
convincing  texts  from  Origen,  Cyprian,  Basil  and  Gregory,  under  the 
bead  o(  antiquity, 

Origen  (flor.  A.  D.  220)  in  Horn.  10  in  Numb. 

**Laicu!»  ai  pe<X4t,  irte  stiuiu  oon  potest  a  life  rre  pecratum,  ted  indigft  »• 
etrdote,  ut  putnit  reniiMiontin  pcccatoruin  accipcre."  The  same  father,  in  hit 
•eventh  bonilly  on  Luke,  "  Si  eniui  hoc  feceniims  et  revelavcruuus  jpeccaU 
nottr*.  non  sofum  Deo;  sed  et  his,  qui  possunt  niederi  rulneribua  aostris  atqu« 
peccatis;  delebuntur  peccata  nostra  ab  co,  aai  ait,  eA:e  delebo,  nt  nabem,  iniqui- 
tatt^a  lu««  et  sicwt  caliginem  necrata  tna."  Tljat.  ver.  ex.  Taj  lor.) 

St,  Cyprian  (flor.  A.  D.  240)  in  lib.  de  lapsis. 

••Coiibteaiitur  wnijuli,  qurrso  *os.  Iratres, delictum  suuni;  dum  adhuc,  qui  deli- 
amt.  in  s.-eculo  eat,  dum  adinitti  ejus  confeagio  potest,  duiu  satisfactio,  et  reuiid- 
•10  facta  pr  swrirdotesanuH  Dominnm  ^rata  est." 

St.  Basil  (flor.  A.  D.  360)  in  Regul.  explic.  et  Reg.  Brev.;  338. 

Iwoyv/tp'tm*  T»  *tmwtm  tw  umgimt  TOtj  ir*rrt9ifH*9K  twfttKtiiri**  Tfl»  acrSf*ov»T»r. 

St  Gregory  M.  (flor.  A.  D.  500)  in  hom.  26  m  Octav.  Pascho. 

"Causae  pensanda;  sunt,  et  cum  lipandi  atque  solvendi  potestas  exercenda,  vi- 
dendum  est,  quae  culpa  ante,  qua  sit  poenitentia  sequuta,  post  en  I  pan;  ut  quof 
onmipotens  Deus  percorapuoctionis^ratiam  vivificat,  iilospastoris  sententmabsoN 
vat:  tunc  enira  vera  est  absolutio  nnesidentis  cum  etcnii  aH)itrium  sequilurjudicis.'* 

••When  St.  James  exhorts  all  christians  *  to  confess  their  sins  to  one  another/ 
rerlainly  it  is  more  agreeable  to  all  spiritual  ends,  that  this  be  done  rather  to 
th«  eoTate  of  souls,  than  to  the  ordinary  brethren.  The  church  of  England  is 
BO  way  engaged  against  it,  but  admires  it  and  practises  it.  The  Calviniatcburch- 
rt  did  not  practise  it  much,  because  they  kne^r  not  well  how  lo  divest  it  from 
its  evil  appendages,  which  are  put  to  it  by  the  customs  of  the  world,  and  to 
which  il  is  too  much  exposed  by  the  interests,  weakr.ciwes,  and  partiahlies  of 
inen.  But  they  commending  it,  shew  they  would  use  it  willingly,  if  thej  could 
Older  it  unto  etlification.  •*  Interim  quin  'sistant  «e  pastori  oves,  quoties  sacrara 
cop'nain  i»rticipaie  volimt,  adeo  non  reclamo,  ut  raaxime  velim  hoc  ubique  obser- 
rari."  Calvin.  Institut  liber,  iii.  c.  4  Sec  12,  13.  And  for  the  Lutheran 
churches,  that  it  is  their  practice,  we  niav  see  in  Chemintios,  2.  part.  Gan. 
Cooc.  Trid.  Cap.  5.  de  Poenit.  who  is  noted  to  this  purpose  by  Bellarmine;  only 
they  alt  consent  (how  vcrj'  consistently)  that  it  is  not  necessary,  nor  of  divine 
institution."    Jeremy  Taylor  of  auricular  confession. 

"  Fbr  they  who  are  spotted  with  sins,  unless  they  be  cured  with  the  prtestiy 
mHthority,  cannot  be  in  *A«  bosom  <^  the  churcK"  stdd  Fobianus  Martyr  {cited 
bu  Taylor.) 


I 


324 


WiMW  A  I'M!    OIV     '1'  H  M 


BOMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


225 


III 


XilrSr"  **"*  ^  T"^  hiiltolf »!«  away  liia  sin.  triit  kw  anJ  oft  print.  tliM  hk 

1  'Vor  'if  w* 'io  IliK  mnA  mrm%  amtmlvm  mA  m\y  to  GiM.  but  to  IIm«»  who  m»  lw«l 
MMiiMli  aini  MM*  mm  mm  mm  U  khmod  uut  hv  him.  who  uy> :  '•  Behojil.  I  wiU  iak«i 
•«■»  mm  MlmiiiiM  ••  ■  iAmmI:,  .uhI'  ymw  ma»  a«  darkmis." 

m  I  betMcJi  ynn.  hrelhren,  let  each  owi  tsoorcM  his  air.*,  while  \m  who  has  Pioood  it  wt 
5.,.'*;„?Py  "*|2^   '?''*'  '"■y  **  •dmittud,  whUe  the  MikHetkNi  and  f mniwiiMi  mada  by 

.»!?  %Jf!T""*  •■«*••"«««!»«>  mmm^^  m  ptmhm  oThia  ao«l.  bat  t»  i««m1  tba  hiiMni 
IblMia  oThM  bean  to  thnae  emtrwtad  wltb  tba  care  of  thw  iftitrm. 

(S)  The  eaa)«i  are  to  bo  wniffhed,  and  when  the  fmwvr  of  hmninf  aiid  hindinr  k  lo  h« 
•proiiad,  wt  Miiial  ana  what  eaaaa  praeeAHl,  and  what  fwoaoco  haa  followed  iha  Ihalt.  that 
the  MilaMa  of  the  paalor  imif  ahMlva  thoM  whom  the  Omoipotent  God.  bj  iha  grace  of 
comfwiietion,  enliwna:  iir  then  iha  abaotatloa  of  the  nioiator  if%orrect.  whea  he  ftJowa 
the  dt«ree^  of  the  'Oteraal  Jadge. 

frw  Saffliah  divinen.  im  thm  of  laat  *|Meeh  afflaturdar.  Janaary  81.] 


THURSDAY.  JAitUARir  19th,  Half-past  9  Jl.  M. 
Hit  3<i  Proposition  heing^  read — 

••  SIm  k  tiM  Babjioo  of  John,  the  Man  of  Sin  of  Pkal,  and  the  Eniptre  of  tb« 

louofcal  Hom  orDmiiers  Sea  Monster/' 

Mb.  Campbell  roae  and  aaid  : 

Icoild  haTe  wished,  my  fellow  citizens,  that  this  proposition  had 
w»ii  Bcaier  the  close  of  this  discussion.  But  as  my  nine  propositionB 
w«re  first  arranged  as  themes  for  lectures,  rather  than  as  propositiont 
lor  Miatii;  I  could  not  materially  alter  cither  the  verbia^  or  order,  ai^ 
ter  I  had  heen  invited  to  discuss  them  with  my  present  opponent. 
Willmit  farther  cercniony,  I  proceed  to  sustain  the  proposition. 

I  am  lot  iiiiciisilile  of  the  difficulties  and  objections  we  have  to  en- 
cotinlert  when  we  presume  to  prove  any  thinff  from  the  fi^rative  and 
symbolic  language  of  prophecy.  The  difficulties  are  not,  however,  so 
^t  as  at  first  view  may  appear.  Symbols  are  eierapi  from  some  of 
im  objecUons  lymg  against  literal  descriptions— 7%«y  tmd  no  tramialion. 
Sun,  moon,  and  stars  speak  the  same  sublime  language  to  every  eye, 
and  suggest  the  same  devout  and  lofty  emotions  to  every  heart.  A 
JiOB,  a  leopard,  a  bear,-^an  earthqiiake,  a  tempest,  a  swelling  sea,  aro 
typs  of  the  same  ideas,  and  call  forth  the  same  thrilling  sentatlons  in 
spectator.  Hence  die  wisdom  in  selecting  appropriate  symbols 
m  the  penoiis  and  scenes  which  fill  up  the  great  drama  of  human  cxis- 
tenoe,  and  diversify  the  prophetic  chart,  which  the  revealing  Spirit 
iioldt  ap  to  the  eye  of  the  diligent  and  faithful  student  of  the  word  and 
'pfovldeiiee  of  God. 

But,  as  on  a  |lobe  of  13  inches  diameter,  the  earth  with  all  ita  oceans 
and  contiBents,  its  mountains  and  valleys,  its  lakea  mi  islands,  cities 
and  districts,  can  be  displayed  in  the  proper  positions  and  relative  sizes 
of  all  Its  partiv  and  in  an  instant  presented  to  the  eye;  so  in  a  symbol, 
can  be  grouped  together  all  the  grand  characteristics  of  a  people  or  an 
•vent,  and  so  accurately  and  comprobensively,  that  by  a  single  glancB 

iJiS®^f  ■?**"*  *^"  ***  learned  than  llrom  the  perusal  of  a  volume. 

TMb  is,  indeed,  an  advantage  which  figurative  representation  has 
over  thiit  which  Is  purely  literal  and  descriptive.  By  a  glance  of  the 
•f*  «  a  f 'o**®,  or  a  map,  one  can  have  a  better  idea  of  a  country,  or 
of  lieeartbf  than  from  the  reading  of  volumes;  so  by  considering  a 
•f mbolio  representation,  we  may  acquire  a  more  vivid  and  comnn 
hentiTO  view  of  a  subject  than  by  the  perusal  of  many  pages. 


There  is  but  one  eye  in  the  universe  that  pierces  al.  nature  through; 
to  which  the  past,  the  present,  and  the  future  arc  equally  plain.  God 
alone  knows  the  future.  He  has  revealed  it.  In  the  seventh  chapter 
of  Daniel,  now  lying  before  me,  we  have  one  great  meridian  line,  which 
runs  from  the  Euphrates  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  and  from  Uie  reign 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  proudest  of  Assyrian  kings,  to  the  ultimate 
triumph  of  the  Gospel  throughout  the  whole  earth. 

We  shall  rapidly  sketch  the  contents  ofthis  chapter,  which  embrace! 
more  of  human  destiny  than  can  be  gleaned  from  all  human  records. 
Daniel  is  in  vision  translated  to  the  Mediterranean — ^the  great  sea— 
■ymbol  of  people  in  commotion  ;  as  the  earth  is  of  the  people  at  res|p 
There  can  he  no  more  appropriate  or  striking  picture  of  human  society 
than  the  sea.  Sometimes  it  is  tranqu'l  and  smooth  as  oil,  like  a  splen- 
did mirror  reflecting  the  azure  vault  of  heaven:  anon  it  is  ruffled  by 
a  gentle  breeze  that  ripples  softly  on  its  bosom :  again,  it  swells  and 
foams  and  rages  in  huge  mountain  waves  that  strike  with  a  sublime 
awe  the  eye  of  every  beholder.  So  the  people  who,  to  day  are  all  in 
peace  and  amity  in  the  smooth  current  of  their  daily  avocations,  by  some 
evil  wind  or  passion  are  swollen  into  some  mob,  or  tumult,  or  tre- 
mendous conflict,  which  for  a  moment  rends  the  social  compact, 
destroys  all  confidence,  and  jeopardizes  the  best  interests  of  all.  Thus 
in  the  symbol  now  before  us ; — the  winds,  the  passions  of  men,  are  in 
some  great  tumult.  They  strive  upon  the  ^eat  sea.  Four  terrific  and 
appalling  savage  monsters  in  quick  succession  rise. 

They  were  all  sea  monsters,  for  God's  symbol  of  a  tyrannical  gov- 
ernment has  always  been  a  savage  wild  beast.  The  first  was  like  a 
lion  with  eagle's  wings — ^the  fortunes  of  this  eagle-winged  lion  com- 
ing out  of  a  tempestuous  sea,  fitly  symbolized  Assyria  in  its  rise,  glo- 
ry, and  decline,  after  the  dynasties  of  more  than  fourteen  hundred  years. 

The  savage  beast,  like  to  a  bear,  raising  itself  on  one  side,  standing 
with  three  ribs  in  its  mouth,  viz.  Babylon,  Lydia  and  Egypt,  represents, 
because  of  its  rapacity  and  cruelty y  the  empire  of  the  Medcs  and  Per- 
sians. This  rose  from  the  sea  which  overwhelmed  the  Assyrian  pow- 
er :  and  it  continued  for  two  hundred  years. 

A  leopard-like  monster,  with  four  heads  and  four  wings  upon  its 
back,  indicates  the  rapid  conquests  of  Alexander.  His  short-lived 
empire  of  ten  years,  reared  upon  the  ruins  of  the  Medo-Persian,  and 
spotted  with  various  nations,  finally  partitioned  among  his  own  four 
principal  generals,  is  most  appositely  represented  by  the  symbol  of  tho 
sixth  verse. 

But  a  fourth  beast«  dreadful  and  tenible,  and  strong  exceedingly, 
having  great  iron  teeth  :  which  devoured  and  brake  in  pieces,  and 
stamped  the  residue  with  the  feet  of  it,  diverse  from  all  the  beasts 
that  were  before  it,  having  ten  horns,  portrays  the  Koman  empire  in 
tliote  fortunes  connected  with  the  principal  figure  In  the  group.  In- 
terpreters are  as  much  agreed  about  the  import  of  these  symbols  as  are 
lexicographers  in  defining  the  ordinary  words  of  human  speech.  For, 
although  they  may  differ  about  the  time  when,  or  the  place  where,  one 
of  these  symbols  may  rise,  or  fall,  there  is  scarcely  any  controversy  on 
the  symbols  themselves,  or  subjects  to  which  they  refer. 

But  the  principal  figure  in  these  four  monsters  remains  yet 
to  "be  described.  "  I  considered,"  says  the  prophet,  "  and,  behold, 
there  came  up  among  them  (rather,  "  behind  them"  and  unohserv- 
«.)    ...oiher    UTT..  HUBN.  before^  which,  thr«e    of  U.e  firs.  horn. 


I't 


DSBAIV  IX!t  Tin 

iPito  {iIucIumI  up  by  tim  roots.**  Mmmf  as  defined  oy  the  Spirit,  roenn 
kiiffs  or  kinjiniioiiis.  Hie  Roman  empire  was  first  partitioned  between 
••iTiings  or  states,  after  the  irruption  of  the  northern  barharians.— 
l%pin,  the  kinff  of  France,  gave  to  a  pope  of  Rome  one  horn,  vts.  the 
tisfchate  of  Ravenna.  Charlemagne  gave  to  Peter's  successor  the 
klmfiomof  the  Lombarda-^the  second  horn ;  and  Lewis  the  Pioua  con- 
imed  to  the  Pope  the  Siaie  if  Bome^  a  third  horn  of  the  original  ten. 
Thus,  before  the  Httk  kom  became  very  conspicuoos,  three  horns  made 
liNim  for  it,  and  it  occupied  their  plaises. 

But  the  ikmntk  Aorn  is  particularly  described  in  the  words  followiitg, 
to  wit :  **  In  this  hom  were  a/a  like  the  eyes  of  a  man,  and  it  had  a 
MwH  speaking  great  things.*'  Here  we  have  a  hom,  a  government, 
full  of  eyes^— sagacious,  politici  eiimin| :  and  eloquent,  persuasive, 
boastful,  rhetorical,  for  such  are  the  chief  attributes  of  the  hmrn  full  of 
tyiis,  having  a  m&uik^  ius.    The  identificatbn  of  this  horn  is  the  grand 

S|ioint  before  us.    We  shall,  therefore,  hastily  seek  out  its  distinguish- 
ttrihtites. 
'  reading  the  chapter  with,  now  and  then,  the  interposition  of  a 
,  we  shall  see  that  the  peculiarities  of  the  HUk  kom  are  clearly 
tad  definitely  marked. 

**  I  beheld,**  says  Daniel,  **I  contemplated  the  horns  till  the  thrones 
were  cast  down  (rather  set  np :  as  in  the  Vulgate,  pouti  mtni,}  and  the 
Ammwv  or  days  did  sit,  whose  garment  was  white  as  snow,  and  the 
hair  of  his  head  like  the  pure  wool,  his  throne  was  like  the  fiery  flame, 
and  his  wh^ls  as  burnin|  fire.  A  fiery  stream  issued  and  came  forth 
from  before  him,  thousand  thousands  ministered  to  him,  and  ten  thou* 
■and  times  len  thousand  stood  before  him,  the  judgment  was  set  and 
•h0  hooks  were  opened.  I  beheld  then,  because  of  the  voice  of  the 
fmnt  words  which  the  hom  snake,  I  beheld  till  the  beast  was  slain 
•ud  Mb  Am%  destroyed^  and  gifen  to  the  burning  flame.*'  Mark,  the 
Mllire  and  complete  destraetion  of  the  beast  of  the  little  ktfrti  is  as- 
signed to  his  arrogance  and  blasphemy, — because  of  the  words  which 
he  spake  against  God  and  his  saints.  The  other  beasts  simply  lost 
their  dominion,  but  their  lives  were  spared.  **  As  concern! nor  the  oth- 
er beaalSt  they  had  their  dominion  taken  away,  but  their  lives  were 
proioiiMi."  So  ends  the  general  statement  concerning  the  whole,  and 
the  broEMi,  and  the  restored,  empire  of  the  fourth  beast. 

But  to  proceed  to  the  second  part  of  the  vision.  *'  I  saw,"  &c. 
**  One  like  a  Son  or  MAn^har^tumk)  came  with  the  clouds  of  hea- 
IfD,  and  came  to  the  Ancient  ifdayst  and  they  brought  him  near  befora 
Um,  and  there  was  givea  him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom, 
1km  all  people,  nations,  and  languages  should  serve  him ;  his  dominion 
is  an  everlastinf  dominion,  which  afaall  not  pass  away,  and  his  king- 
dom that  which  shall  not  be  destroyed.  I  asked  the  meaning  of  all  this, 
■0  he  told  me  and  made  me  understand  the  interpretation  of  Uie  things." 

We  have  now  an  interpretation  authorized  and  confirmed.  »*The8e  great 
beasts  which  are  four,  are  four  kings  which  shall  arise  out  of  the  earth. 
But  the  saints  of  the  Most  Hioh  shall  take  (receive)  the  kingdom, 
and  possess  the  kingdom  for  ever — even  for  ever  and  ever."  "Then 
1  would  know  the  troth  (meaning)  of  the  fourth  beast  (empire,) 
and  of  the  ten  homa ;  and  of  that  hom  that  had  eyes,  and  a  mouth  that 
■pake  very  great  thtnjFs,  whose  look  was  more  stout  than  his  fellows." 
The  inletpieling  aogei  then  explatna  this  portion  of  the  vision.    ''  The 


ROMAH  cathomc  rbligiox. 


227 


fbnrth  beast  shall  he  the  fourth  kingdom."  (King  and  kin|:dom  are 
BomeUmes  used  interchangeably.)  There  never  were  but  four  great 
universal  empires  on  earth,  and  there  neper  will  he  another,  ^cept  that 
of  the  Messiah.— His  universal  empire  will  be  the  fifth.  The  fourth 
beast  "  shall  devour  the  whole  earth,  and  shall  tread  it  down  and  break 
it  in  pieces."— So  did  the  Roman  empire.  And  the  ten  horns  are  len 
kings  (or  kingdoms)  which  shall  arise  out  of  this  empire  or  kingdom  ; 
and  another  (thk  little  horn)  shall  arise  after  them.  And  he  shall 
be  DIVERSE  (not  merely  political)  from  the  first  (ten)  and  he  shall  sub- 
due  three  kings ;  not  only  shall  three  of  the  kings  give  place  to 
him«--hut  he  shall  destroy  the  antagonist  power  of  the  three  empires 
that  preceded  his.  "He  shall  speak  great  words  against  the 
Moot  High,  and  shall  wear  mi  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,  and 
think  to  change  times  and  /awt.— (These  three  never  met  in  any  beings 
eave  the  popes  of  Rome.)  And  they  shall  be  given  into  his  hand  un- 
til a  time,  and  times,  and  the  dividing  of  a  time." 

A  time  is  one  annual  revolution  ;  a  times,  two ;  and  half  a  time, 
halfayear;  in  all,/or/y-/u»o  months ;  or  one  thousand  two  hundred 
and  three  score  days,— the  product  of  forty-two  thirties  ;  or  forly-two 
Jewish  months.  Of  all  this,  and  of  one  day  being  given  for  a  year, 
there  is  no  controversy  among  Catholics  or  Protestants.  The  continu- 
ance  of  the  empire  of  the  little  horn  is  therefore  predestined  to  twelve 

hundred  and  sixty  years.  .  ,  .  j 

But  the  judgment  shall  sit.  The  long  prayed  for  and  expected  judg- 
ment shall  be  given  in  favor  tfthe  saints.  Then  shall  be  taken  away 
his  dominion  to  eonmme  and  to  destroy  it  unto  the  end  or  consumma- 
tion. "  Then*'  with  anticipated  triumph  be  it  spoken—"  the  kingdom 
and  dominion  and  the  greatness  of  the  kingdom,  under  the  whole 
heaven  shall  be  given  to  the  people  of  the  saints  of  the  Most  Htf;h, — 
(They  were  not  all  worn  out  by  the  Little  Hom)  whose  kingdom  is  an 
everlasting  kingdom,  and  all  dominions  shall  serve  andobev  him. 
Hitherto  is  the  end  of  the  matter. 
Now  of  all  these  items  the  sum  is —  -  ,    „  ,. 

1.  It  is  a  beast,  or  empire,  or  power,  that  ^w  out  of  the  Roman  beast 
S.  It  rose  after  the  empire  was  divided  into  ten  kingdoms. 

3.  It  was  a  new  and  different  power,  saffacious  and  politic— with 
human  eyes — an  eloquent,  persuasive,  and  dennnciatoi^^  power. 

4.  It  supplanted   and  displaced  Mrcc  of  the  original   states  of  the 
Roman  empire  or  of  the  ten  kingdoms  into  which  it  was  at  first  divided. 

5.  It  assumed  more  than  any  other  empire.    It  uttered  great  things 
•nd  its  look  was  more  stout  (daring)  than  its  fellows. 

6.  It  made  war  not  against  sinners,  like  other  empires— it  made  war 

'^X'^iS^  for.  long  .im«. gainst  them.  It  «».««rf/fc«»6." 

8.  It  presumed  to  change  Umn  and  laws.  How  many  fasts,  aad 
Irast8,and  saints,  and  new  laws,  and  institutions  has  this  power  set  op ! 

9.  It  had  power  to  hold  in  subjection  all  saints,  and  to  lord  it  over 
them  for  a  Ion  or  time. 

10.  It  was  to  be  consumed,  gradually  wasted  as  the  Protestant  Ke- 
formation  has  been  wasting  its  power  and  substance  for  three  ceulunes 
..4ind  is  yet  finally,  suddenly  and  completely  to  be  destroyed.  Can 
my  learned  opponent  find  all  these  characteristics  and  circumstances  in 
mu?  other  power  or  empire  in  the  history  of  all  time !    1  trust  he  will 


I 


BBHATB  0?l  TIIB 

fit «  me  an  opimrtunity  to  mf9l§m  on  them  fxiiiita  and  to  defend  tlie« 

Bore  fully. 

Meiintifiie,  to  excite  attention,  I  poeititrely  affirm  that  these  items 
leter  met  in  any  King^,  Kingdom,  State  or  Empire,  save  that  of  Papal 
Moine.  There,  and  there  only,  can  they  all  be  found  as  large  as  life; 
and  as  exact  as  answers  the  image  in  the  mirror  to  the  face. 

Bill  1  hasten  to  identify  this  prediction  with  the  Babylon  of  John. 

And  in  doing  this  I  can  at  present  hat  sketch  the  rudest  outline.    Let 

"i  open  the  13ih  chapter, 

John  stands  in  vision  on  the  shore  of  the  great  sea,  the  Meditarrane- 

I.    He  saw  a  savage  beast  rising  out  of  the  sea.    It  had  $eom  hmd» 

and  leu  AeriM,  and  on  its  heads  the  names  of  blasphemy It  resembled 

the  limit  tie  bear,  and  the  leopard.  It  was  composed  of  all  that  is 
••▼afe.  The  dragon,  the  serpent  of  my  opponent.  Pagan  Rome  gaT0 
him  hw  power  and  his  throne,  and  great  authority.— How  much  does 
this  memblc  the  vision  of  Daniel !  This  seven  headed  Empire  with 
ten  home — It  Is  on  this  beast  the  woman  sat — subsequently  pictured 
out  as  Babylon  the  Great.  This  is  the  Latin  Empire  which  Kustatnei 
thei  Latin  church.  This  is  the  beast  out  of  which  the  Little  Horn  grew. 
Ilic  wounded  head  or  the  imperial^  which  was  the  sixth  head,  was 
healed  by  the  great  Charles,  and  his  new  empire  controlled  by  the  ec- 
eletiastic  beasu  spoke  blaspheoiiea  and  daring  things  against  God,  hit 
name,  and  all  that  dwell  In  heaven.  This  new  religious  and  poUacal 
Empire  "made  war  against  the  saints  and  overcame  them."."  And  itcon- 
*»nww  (orfort^two  months"  "a  time,  and  times  and  a  dividing  of  time.' 
His  dominion  extended  over  all  the  western  Roman  Empire.     But 

next  comes  the  IMtk  ifom— the  ecclesiastical  beast In  John^s  vision 

this  beast  resembles  a  lamb,  but  it  speaks  like  a  dragon.'  Christian 
Rome  spoke  like  Pagan  Rome !  It  obliged  aU  ike  mrfk  to  worship  the 
dragon— It  was  Calholie  !  !  It  made  an  image  of  the  Pagan  beast.  Il 
gjve  life  to  this  image,  and  compelled  all  to  die  or  worship  the  image 
of  the  Pagan  heast.  It  was  then  a  bloody  persecuting  beast.  It  wai 
Mohtrous  as  Pagan  Rome.  But  instead  of  worshining  dead  heroes 
it  worships  dead  saints-^nstead  of  Goddesses  it  has  Lordeases;  angels 
instead  of  demi-gods.— 

Indeed  Papal  Rome  has  borrowed  much  from  Pagan  Rome— Old 
Mpne  had  her  pmt^fex  wmmmmM^  her  purgatory,  priests  and  priestesses* 
her  victims  and  "  A«ito."  She  had  her  lustral  water  as  modern  Rome 
has  her  holy  water.  She  had  her  vestal  virgins  as  her  descendant  hat 
ber  nuns.  She  had  her  Pantheon  as  modern  Rome  has  her  Vatican, 
and  in  the  niches  where  stood  the  gods  of  the  dragon  now  stand  the 
■aints  of  the  Roman  Draconic  lamb. 

Mj  present  argument  requires  me  to  identify  this  beast  with  thf 
mmm  church  or  with  the  Little  Horn.— And  therefore  in  addiaon  Ic 
the  resembling  attributes  already  traced  I  proceed  to  the  most  definite 
®r  its  marks.  "  Here  is  wisdom.  Let  him  who  has  understaodint 
conpute  the  number  of  the  beast :  for  it  is  the  number  of  a  man,  and 
bit  number  is  six  hundred  and  sixty  six."— 

The  ecclesiastic  beast,  or  kingdom  is  thus  definitely  the  letters  of  a 
Mine  which  together  make  666.  The  name  of  a  man  is  the  name  of 
tills  kingdom.  Now  we  begin  with  a  Roman  saint.— even  with  the 
peat  IreniBus.  We  shall  find  in  the  name  of  the  king  and  founder  of 
Ibe  Laun  empire  the  name  of  this  propheuc  personage— It  is  said  by 


SOMAN  CATHOLIC    VSLI6ION. 


829 


die  Mini  that  imong  the  Greeks  the  king's  name  was  written  Laieinm 
^(he  letters  of  which  being  numerals  in  that  language  exactly  make  tht 
iam:lbr  a      ao 


T 
t 

V 

t 


s 

10 

m 
m 

goo 

'666 


He  made  the  name  of  the  founder  stand  for  the  name  of  the  empire. 
But  Bellarmine,  a  learned  Jesuit,  objects  to  this— that  in  the  language 
and  at  the  time  the  Revelation  was  written  the  oi^ho^phy  of  this  name 
was  A«T/rcf,  and  not  A-nww.  And  this  being  so  there  is  a  plausible,  nay  a 
relevant  objection  aginst  the  interpretation  of  Irenaeus.  We  pause  not 
to  examine  this  matter ;  because  we  find  a  much  more  consistent  and 
convincing  exposition  In  the  tme  and  proner  name  of  the  Institution 
which  in  Greek  was  always  written  in  full. 

HAmrt^n&siiKitx.  The  Latin  Kingdom.  H^-S,  A=3n.  »=-l,  t-=300,  »— IS^  v-kSO, 
il»R.  &^2,  »-=!.  «-=900.  •=-10,  )c=30,  1=5.  .=-10,  »=1 :    The  aum.  666. 

The  conclusion  from  these  premises  is,  that  as  there  is  no  other  kmg- 
dom  on  earth  whose  name  is  exactly  666^and  as  the  beast,  the  symbol 
of  this  kingdom,  has  been  proved  to  be  the  Latin  emjnre^  and  He  La* 
iine  Basifeia,  being  proved  to  contain  666,  this  definitely  and  clearly 
marks  out  the  Roman  Institution  as  that  to  which  the  13th  chapter  of 
the  apocalypse  and  the  7th  chapter  of  Daniel  refer. 

The  only  question  of  apparent  difficulty  that  can  be  here-asked,  is  : 
—Whether  Rome  Pagan  or  Rome  Papal  is  intended :  for  th'it  Rome 
is  intended  cannot  be  questioned.  That  it  is  Rome  Papal  is  evident 
from  the  fact  that  what  is  called  the  second  Beast,  chap.  13,  verse  12,  is, 
chap.  18  and  20,  called  the  false  prophet— and  this  is  the  beast  whose 
name  is  given  as  numerically  equivalent  to  666. 

This  moreover  explains  that  love  of  Latin  which  to  this  day  distin- 
guishes this  party.  They  not  only  have  long  gloried  in  the  name  Bo' 
man  or  Latin  Catholic  or  Church  of  Rome,  but  they  still  say  mass  in 
Latin,  and  perform  their  religious  services  in  that  dead  language  ;  for 
although  Paul  "  had  rather  speak  five  sentences  in  the  vernacular,  than 
ten  thousand  sentences  in  an  unknown  tongue" — that  he  might  edify 
his  hearers,— and  although  in  the  age  of  the  "  primitive  Fathers"  the 
whole  church  prayed  and  taught  in  the  language  of  every  country 
where  they  worshiped  ;  still  for  the  sake  of  Latin,  to  this  day  and  even 
in  this  country,  Romanists  perform  their  most  devout  services  in  that 
dead  and  foreign  tongue  as  though  God  himself  preferred  that  language 
to  every  other.  Thus  they  are  providentially  bearing  to  all  nations  and 
languages  the  grand  mark,  and  the  number  of  the  name  which  identifies 
them  as  the  beast  and  Babylon  of  John. 

To  return  to  the  imagery  of  the  Prophet  John  : — ^In  tlie  17tli  chapter 
this  ecclesiastic  establishment  is  compared  to  a  great  harlot,  with  whom 
the  kings  of  the  earth  have  committed  fornication,  and  as  having  intox- 
icated all  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  with  the  wine  of  her  whoredom. 
The  woman  is  further  identified  by  being  described  as  silting  upon  a 
§earld  bead,  full  of  blasphemous  names,  having  Eeven  heads  and  tm 
karmt  and  she  is  adorned  with  purple  and  scarlet,  with  gold,  and  dia- 
monds, and  pearis ;  having  a  golden  cup  in  her  hand,  full  of  the  abomi- 
„Uo„a„^dp<.l.u.ionofherwbored,»s.    She  had  upoo  her  forehead  he, 


9i^ 


HBBATE   OM'   WUM 


SOMAN   CAiaOUC    SEU6IOX. 


'•'Wr'JI   , 


''w 


i<iif 


* 


;li 


If 


■MBO  Wllini  |«>^'  MTSRETt  iSAItUIII  TBI '  tvBtAT*  TUB  MUTHkI  Of 

PnniiHtt  samm  vat  AMiiiiifATWKs  or  thb  EAweruJ*  And  to  mtkt 
the  matter  more  certain,  the  Spirit  testifies,  Terse  18 :  **The  woman 
which  yon  saw  is  the  great  city  (spiritually  called  Babylon,  literally, 
Papal  Rome)  that  rules  over  the  Mnffs  of  the  earth.'* 

Having  thus  connected  these  symbols,  and  seen  the  co-sdaptation  to 
the  same  subject  we  shall  here  introduce  the  Apostle  Paul  with  his 
plain  and  unfigrurative  description  of  the  Man  of  8in,  2d  chap.  2d  The»* 
••lonians,  and  examine  the  congruity  of  his  description  with  the  sym- 
liols  of  Daniel  and  John.  He  may  be  regarded  as  the  literal  interpre- 
ter of  them  both. 

**  Ijtl  no  mm  deceit e  yon  by  any  meam :  for  that  daj  shall  not  come, 
•Ifffiiit  there  come  a  falling  away  first,  and  that  man  of  sin  be  revealed, 
tiw  Lu  of  perdition ;  who  oppo<4th  and  exalteth  himself  above  allUial 
u  ealled  God,  or  that  is  worshiped;  so  that  he,  as  God,  sitteth  in  the 
tMiple  of  God,  shewing  himself  that  he  is  God.  Remember  ye  not, 
that,  when  1  was  yet  with  you,  I  told  you  these  things !  And  now  ye 
kiMiw  what  withholdeth  that  he  might  be  revealed  in  his  time.  For 
tiM  mystery  of  iniquity  doth  already  work ;  only  he  who  now  letteth 
will  let,  until  he  he  taken  out  of  the  way.  And  then  shall  that  Wick« 
ed  be  revealed,  whom  the  Lord  shall  consume  with  the  spirit  of  his 
mouth,  and  shall  destroy  with  the  brightness  of  his  coming:  Even 
him,  whose  coming  is  after  the  working  of  Satan,  with  all  powers,  and 
signs,  and  lying  wonders,  and  with  all  deceivableness  of  unrighteous* 
MSS  in  ^em  that  perish  ;  because  they  received  not  the  love  of  the 
tMlh,  thatlliey  might  be  saved."  Verses  3 — 10. 

The  Apostle  foretells  an  iifrntmy  fa  falling  away)  in  the  Church ; 
which  apostarj  would  issue  in  the  full  revelation  or  manifestation  of 
IHB  Maw  or  Sm,  (or  ofidoiatry^  for  this  is  tke  sin  of  Jews  and  Gen- 
ilet.)  The  Jiifi  o^  Sin  is  agam  designated  as  the  Son  or  PcnoiTioir. 
He  was  Ibe  subject  of  past  prophecy  as  Judas  was;  for  on  that  account 
he  too  was  called  the  Son  of  Perdition— foredoomed  to  ruin.  The  names 
oiMinaf&n  and  Stm  ofruin^  fitly  represent  this  apostacy.  The  at- 
tributes ar#d  circumstances  peculiar  to  this  passage  are  tlie  following. 

1.  He  was  to  come  forward  stealthily  by  degrees  and  unol'served, 
(like  Daniers  Little  Horn, to  grow  up  behind  the  others)  "The  secret, 
or  mystery  of  iniquity  already  inwardly  works.** 

S.  He  could  not  be  revealed  Ull «'  lie  who  restrains  or  lets  (the  Pa- 
gan power)  be  taken  out  of  the  way."  Political  power  as  well  as  ec- 
clesiastic was  necessary  to  his  development.  So  the  Little  Horn 
did  not  appear  conspicuous  till  alter  the  ten  horns  grew  out  of  the 
Iburth  beast.  The  Maa  of  Sin  is,  in  historic  truth,  the  youngest  horn 
that  sprang  from  the  Pa|rao  beast. 

S.  He  was  to  eialt  himself  above  all  that  Is  called  a  Goi^  or  an 
object  of  worship.  My  learned  opponent  will  agree  with  me  that  God 
hem  may  mean,  as  sometimes  it  does  in  the  Bible,  a  magistrate  or  king. 
And  certainly  not  only  in  the  arfSgant  titles  which  he  assumes,  but 
in  tho  diajMnsafions  which  he  has  granted,  in  respect  to  laws 
divinn  and  human,  no  magistrate,  kini,  or  potentate,  ever  ^laim- 
od  so  much  on  earth  as  the  Man  of  Sin,  as  tlie  Popes  of  Rome 
He  is  not  only  styled  «  Universal  Father,'*  "  Holy  Father,"  "  His 
Holiness,'*  ••  Sovereign  Pontiff,**  "Supreme  Head  of  the  Church 
on  Eanh,'*  '•  Pater  Familias,"  "  Successor  of  Peter,"  "  Prince  of  tho 


apostles,**  "Infallible  One.'*  "Vi«ar  of  ChrisC*  "  Lieuteiwint  of 
Christ,*'  •*  Prince  i>f  the  World  ;**  bat  be  is  styled,  still  more  blaspbo- 
roonsly,  ♦•  Lord  of  Lords,**  a  god  on  earth,  "  Lord  God  the  Pope.** 

4.  He  places  himself  "  in  iTie  temple  of  God."  This  ascertains  ths 
Man  of  Sin  more  specifically  than  any  other  attribute  or  circumstance  in 
the  passage.  He  is  no  Pagan  idolater ;  he  is  no  infidel  Jew ;  he  is  no 
author  of  a  new  religion ;  but  he  siis  in  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christy- 
God's  building— God's  temple— holding  the  fundamental  truths  of  re- 

igion,  as  did  this  community  when  the  Man  of  Sin  invaded  the 
Church;  for,  yet,  the  great/oc^  of  Chrisiianity  are  acknowledged  by 
the  Church  of  Rome,  though  ^^made  ifiw  effect  by  her  traditions. 

5.  Ho  exhibits  or  "shows  himself  to  be  a  god.**  He  claims  to 
reiim  not  only  for  Christ  as  his  vicar,  but  the  homage  due  to  a  repre- 
sentative of  God  lie  haughtily  appropriates  to  himself.     Such  is  tho 

Erediction  of  the  man  of  sin ;  and  who  that  is  conversant  with  the 
istory  of  the  popes  of  Rome,  from  their  coronation,  standing  on  the 
altar  in  St.  Peter's  church,  receiving  the  title  of  God's  vicegerent, 
assuming  the  honors  of  tlie  supreme  head  of  the  whole  church ;  pow- 
er over  tSe  angels  of  heaven,  over  the  inhabitants  of  Hades,  and  over 
the  laws  and  statutes  of  the  bible,  can  think  that  Paul  exagrgerdtes  the 
picture  by  saying  that  this  son  of  perdition,  and  man  of  sin,  was  to 
pass  himself  off,  was  to  "«Ao«;  himself  as  a  God,'*''  „  «    iv_ 

6.  He  is  called  the  lawless  one  ;  verse  8,  "  the  wicked  one.  So  Da- 
niel's  little  horn  is  represented  as  "  changing  (or  seeking  to  change)  the 
times  and  the  laws."  Instances  of  such  dispensations  and  indulgences 
could  be  multiplied,  ad  libitum^  demonstrative  that  such  have  always 
been  the  professions  and  assumptions  of  the  "  Princes  cf  tke  Jpostles,** 

7.  But  another  incident  in  the  history  of  the  decline  of  the  man  of 
ain  deserves  our  attention,  and  singularly  identifies  him  with  the  em- 
pire of  the  little  horn.  "  Whom  the  Lord  shall  consume  (or  slay)  br 
the  spirit  of  his  mouth,  and  destnn/  by  the  brightness  of  his  coming. ' 
And  of  the  dominion  of  the  little  horn,  says  Daniel:  "They  shall 
ionsume  and  destroy  it  to  the  end.*'  Paul  seems  to  have  quoted  the 
▼ery  words  of  Daniel,  and  thus  most  unquestionably  identified  the 
iiMfi  ^  «fi  and  iiltle  horn  as  designating  the  same  apostacy  from 
Christ  and  his  religion.  ....  j 

8.  In  describing  the  coming  of  this  man  of  sin,  he  is  compared  to 
the  deceptions,  assumptions,  and  approaches  of  Satan,  who  has  often 
assumed  a  divine  mission  or  the  power  of  miracles.  So  the  Roman 
church  has  ever  pretended  to  the  power  of  working  miracles,  and  has 
gained  and  still  retains  much  power  by  false  signs  and  lying  wonders. 

Of  this  apostacy,  and  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  this  man  of  sin, 
as  described  by  Paul,  we  may  mark  his  growth  and  progress  in  full 
agreement  with  the  records  of  authentic  history  in  the  following  order 
and  style :— He  was  an  embryo  in  Paul's  time.  (The  mystery  of  in- 
iquity doth  already  Inwardly  work).  He  was  an  infant  in  the  time  of 
Victor  1.,  195.  He  was  a  bold  and  daring  lad  in  the  time  of  Constan- 
tino tho  Great  A  sturdj  atripling  in  the  days  of  Leo  I.,  when  au- 
ricular confession  came  in.  He  was  nineteen  years  old  in  the  days 
of  Justinian's  code ;  and  a  young  man  full  twenty-one,  when  Boni- 
face HL  received  from  Phocas  the  title  of  Universal  Patriarch  or 
Pope,  A.  D.  606.  He  was  twenty-five  when  Pepin  and  Charlemagne 
cave  him  political  power  and  fflory,  A.  D.  760 :  and  at  full  prime,  or 
at  thiity-five,  when  Gregory  the  Great  took  the  crown  from  the    e»n- 


ft 


• 


ii 


iilii 

TPl 


pi 


339  DBHATB   ON    TIIK 

fcioff  Ilfmj  mil  gave  it  to  Rodolpliua.  He  Imd  leacKed  his  gnmd  «ii« 
naetocib  In  tlio  dfty*  of  Wiekliff,  mi  Luther  give  h|iii..^. mortal  thnisty 
which  iiitiodiicod  iRtohis  syslem  thai  chronic  consmnption  under  which 
he  has  ever  since  lingered.  But  it  remains  for  John  the  apostle,  and  lait 
prophet  of  the  church,  to  declare  his  last  agonv  and  final  overthrow. 

As  we  have  no  time  more  than  to  slcetdi  the  naked  outline,  wf 
ahai  haalBii  to  the  consummation,  as  respects  the  Bah j Ion  of  John 
■o  eineiiy  Identified  with  the  subject  before  us.  In  his  apocalyptic 
developments,  18th  chajpter,  he  deelares  her  final  doom.  My  propo- 
sition carries  in  it  the  indication  of  a  monster.  Ske  is  the  Mm  of 
8tn !  Bahfkm  the  Greai-^^  eit^f  a  hemtf  a  woman^  a  i/o/e,  a  per»eew 
ting  power  {  aearid^  purple,  drunken  with  the  blood  of  the  lotnit,  with 
IkeMaod  of  ike  mmr^fr$  *f  Jetun ! !  Mvstbry  !  By  mystory  she  rose, 
she  reigns ; — ^her  mystery  of  pureatory,  transubstantiation,  relics,  mi- 
racles, signs,  sacraments,  and  unfathomable  doctrines,  have  given  her 
power :  for,  says  Paul,  (2d  Thess.  ii.)  describing  the  advances  of  this 
son  of  ruin,  and  lawless  one,  "  His  coming  Is  according  to  the  ope* 
ration  of  Satan,  in  all  power  and  lying  wondern." — Douay  Testament. 

Babylon,  the  ancient  capital  of  Chaldea,  great  as  it  was,  was  but 
the  type*  Her  antityne  is  the  spiritual  city.  This  city  sits  upon  the 
seven  mountains  of  tne  *'*'Hoiu  Moman  Empire^*''  which  the  heirs  of 
Papin  elected.  For  thus  did  they  blasphemously  designate  the 
new  empire  erected  out  of  the  seven  grand  electorates  of  Germany ; 
the  seven  heads  of  that  empire  which  sustained  the  assumptions  of 
the  papal  see. 

But  we  have  now  to  do  with  her  overthrow.  The  means  of  her  decay 
are,  first,  the  spirit  of  the  Lord's  mouth.  The  reading,  preaching,  and 
f  lienlating  of  Ine  Bible.  The  second  is  the  hatred  of  the  ten  horns ;  "For 
the  ten  horns  which  thou  sawest  upon  the  beast,  these  shall  hate  the 
whoie^  and  shall  make  her  desolate  and  naked,  and  shall  eat  her  flesh 
|nd  burn  her  with  fire.*'  iVesA  is  the  symbol  of  riches.  And  riches 
aha  has  had  beyond  comparison.  It  Is  said,  that  in  two  churches  in 
flfsin,  some  fifty  years  since,  there  were  more  gold  and  silver,  in 
aainlB,  apostles,  and  angels,  than  the  richest  sovereign  in  Europe  was 
worth.  Her  real  and  personal  estate  has  never  yet  heen  valued.  But 
the  political  powers  shall  get  tired  of  the  cupidity  and  insatiable  ap- 
petite of  this  monster,  and  shall  plunder  her  resources  and  confiscate 
her  estaiOv  as  in  France  and  England,  and  thus  shall  her  ruin  com 
miPiS*  Bmt  at  the  moment  when  judgment  shall  be  given  in  favor 
nf  tha  saints  of  the  Most  Highr— when  the  hour  of  her  destruction 
has  come  suddenly  and  in  an  instant,  as  when  an  angel  hurls  a  mill- 
stone  into  the  sea,  shall  Home  with  all  her  glory  be  swallowed  down, 
and  engulphed  in  immediate  and  eternal  ruin.  We  do  expect  In  the 
inal  cataatrephe  of  Papal  Rome  a  combination  and  concentration  of 
Almighty  wrath.  The  vials  of  God's  fiercest  anger  await  her.  The 
Plamies  of  Egypt,  Sodom,  and  Jerusalem  are  In  store  for  the  Son 
of  Perdition.  In  the  battle  of  Armageddon,  blood  shall  flow  for 
liHa  furlongs,  to  the  bite  of  the  horses'  bridles.  It  is  remarkable, 
that  this  1600  furlongs  make  exactly  the  whole  extent  of  the  State  of 
Borne,  whkh  the  popes  have  so  long  held.  From  the  Tiber  to  the 
Po  Is  jiat  mn  miles  or  1600  furlongs.  Still  the  laat  act  of  this  ap- 
palling drama  will  be  short.  The  aitllleiy  of  Heaven's  vengeance 
shall  hnrot  upon  her  In  a  mmiMili  Ibr  Omnipotence  has  a  long  con- 
troversy affainst  her  for  her  evil  deeds.    !  have  cnly  time  'o  add,  On:! 


■OMAN   CATHOLIC    SSLIOION. 


233 


H  fbings  said  by  Daniel,  Paul,  and  John  perfectly  harmomze  in  Aa 
a«w«etiuess  and  eompleteness  of  her  destruction.  However  gradiiaJ, 
Ibr  a  time,  the  oonsninption  and  decay  of  her  strength  and  glory,  she 
will  die  a  violent  death ;  for  all  the  witnesses  attest  that  a  mddaa  and 
overwhelming  destruction  awaite  her.    ^  , .     ,      ,  ^  .     .  ._. . 

But  amid  ttie  tremendous  darkness  of  this  dread  hour,  ttie  bnght 
and  morning  star  of  Israel  appeara:  for  as  soon  as  the  flying  angel, 
as  it  flite  across  the  heavens,  announces  in  words  of  everlasting  joy, 
that  the  hour  of  her  judgment  has  come,  the  angel  in  his  rear,  aUeij- 
dant  on  his  flight,  shouts  triumphantly  from  east  to  west :  **  It  is  fal- 
len! It  is  fallen !  Babylon  the  great  is  fallen!"  Then  shall  there  be 
•'voicesandthnnders,  and  lightnings,  and  the  universal  eaiihquake 
which  shall  bring  the  cities  of  the  Gendles  to  the  dust."  Then  will 
be  the  time  when  a  voice  from  heaven  exultingly  shall  say:  "K^ 
loice  over  her,  ye  holy  apostles  and  prophete:  for  God  has  avenged 
von  on  her!  Then  the  immense  multitude  of  samls,— the  martyred 
minions  in  heaven  shall  say :  Hallelujah  !  Salvation,  and  glwy,  and 
power  to  the  Lord  our  God :  for  his  judgmente  are  true  and  nghteous : 
for  he  has  judged  the  great  harlot,  who  corrupted  the  earth  with  her 
fornication,  and  he  has  avenged  the  blood  of  his  servants  shed  bv  her 
hand !  And  a  second  time  they  said,  Hallelujah !  and  the  smoke  oT 
her  torment  ascended  forever  and  ever!"  ,       ,   ,  ^  ,  . 

Then,  indeed,  shall  the  kingdoms  of  the  whole  earth  become  the 
kincrdoms  of  the  Lord,  and  of  his  anointed.  Then  the  cause,  so  long 
oppressed,  shall  universally  triumph :  for  ages  of  prosperity  and  joy 
are  vet  to  crown  the  labors  of  Messiah;  and  untold  millions,  the 
trophies  of  his  mediation  are  yet  to  gladden  heaven  and  earth  by  their 
cheerful  submission  io  his  authority,  who  shall  then  be  acknowledged 
the  TishtM  King  of  kings  and  Lord  (f  Iord».    .     ,^     _^  . 

Such  a  catastrophe  is  even  feared  at  Rome  itself.  The  popes  hwe 
uttered  it  abroad ;  they  have  proclaimed  to  the  world  that  they  felt  St.- 
Peter's  chair  tremble  under  them;— that  the  throne  of  the  prince  of 
the  apostles  now  tottera  to  its  fall.  In  dolorous  strains  they  lament  in 
their  encyclical  lettere  the  prevalence  of  liberal  (with  them  infidel) 
principles.  Even  in  Italy  and  in  Spain  the  sovereign  pontiff  observes 
Indications  of  the  spirit  of  the  age.  Free  discussion,  the  liberty  of 
the  press,  or  even  a  whisper  about  free  government,  m  the  environs 
of  Rome,  grievously  afflicte  him.  It  has  been  said  by  the  most  mtel- 
liffent  in  the  internal  affaire  of  Roman  Catholic  ccuntnes,  that  it 
would  not  be  the  most  unexpected  event  if  the  present  incumbent  of 
the  Papal  chair  should  be  the  last  of  the  popes  of  Rome. 

Public  opinion  is  fast  changing  even  in  those  countries,  and  there 
IS  an  undercurrent  which,  like  a  subterraneous  fire,  is  liquifying  the 
foundations  of  the  hills  and  mountains  on  which  this  proud  super- 
structure rcare  ite  aspiring  head.  The  pope  is  looking  abroad,  per- 
haps to  the  "mountains  of  the  moon,"  or  to  the  great  valley,  as  to  a 
wilderness.  In  which  there  may  be  an  asylum  reared  for  lam  in  such 
a  contingency  as  might  drive  him  from  the  Eternal  city,  who  knows 
hut  that  the  ecclesiastic  politics  of  Roman  Catholic  Europe  have 
aided  the  tide  of  emigration  prospectively,  on  the  chances  that  are  to 
decide  the  fortunes  of  Uie  hierarcliy  in  the  Old  World. 

But  the  destinies  of  western  Rome,  the  theatre  of  the  prophecies 
before  us,  exhaust  the  symbols  of  \hf^  ^redicuons.    The  fortunes 
of  our  country  and  of  the  Papacy  here,  belcng  to  another  chapter. 
U  2  2111 


It 


lIBiATB  ON   THB 


SOMAN  CATROUC  BXLIOION. 


235 


'ill 
I 

'III 

14 


i 


Wliether  il  aliall  simtiltaaeoitftly  fall  im  tlie  New  world,  or  shall  seek 
,lHPt  to  reeruit  ilt  shattoied  iii'liiiilit  an  ~ 


ami  9Mk  to  found  a  great  Aiihi- 
Romaii  Catholic  hietarchy,  is  •  quitliiM  of  grave  import, 
vhieh  it  Is  am.  my  pmwimm  to  examine. 

Such,  however,  are  its  origin,  its  historYt  and  its  doom  in  the  OM 
world,  as  sketched  hy  the  nii|fer  of  God.  And  the  history  of  Eu« 
•SpSiv  inr  twelve  hundred  and  thirty  years,  proves,  beyond  a  reasonable 
'Mlil»ri>'iMl  BanieL  Paul,  and  John  spake  as  tkey  were  moved  by  the 
.HfllV'  opifit. 
I  'Oannot  .sil  down  wi'thoat  an  apolooy  iar  the  indeaest'  of  this  gieat^ 
It  would  require  hours  to  ilTiip  the  map  wUeh  I  have  laid 
you.  I  have  endeaTored  only  to  estah  ish  the  ^nd  landmarks, 
and  point  out  the  bearings  of  piopheey  upon  this  instttution.  In  hopes 
ihit  my  learned  opponent  will  give  me  an  opportunity  to  fortify  the 
weak  points^  and  to  illustrale  the  obscuie,  I  give  place ;  having,  as  | 
jud|e,  isdeemed  the  pledge  which  I  tendered  m  my  fourth  proposition : 
for  m  the  history  of  all  time,  no  person  will  ever  find  any  one  sub- 
jert  in  which  so  many— nay,  all  the  grand  characteristics  of  this 
piophelle  tyranny,  so  clearly,  liteially,  and  hamioniously  meet  as  in 
npii  liiino.  On  this  point  1  challenge  special  investigauon.— [Time 
"  r'jiliif  9  minutes*] 

Maff  pad  10  o*ok^t  J,  M 


B'lmop  PmtcBLL 

Before  I  take  review  of  my  friend's  last  speech,  T  wish  to  complete 
my  previous  one.  I  was  speaking  on  the  subject  of  auricular  and  pri- 
vate confession,  when  I  was  last  up,  and  endeavoring  to  prove  that  it 
was  a  practice  not  contrary  to  scripture,  nor  immoral.  I  have.  In  proof 
of  this  Dosition,  quoted  authorities  from  scripture,  from  the  ancient  re- 
cords or  the  Catholic  church,  and  from  the  divines  and  practice  of  the 
.  Enffllah  ehoioh*  I  now  add  to  them,  a  quotation  from  the  discipline 
of  the  Methodist  church,  edition  of  183{^,  New- York.  And,  to  show 
that  every  argument  addressed  to  you  hj  my  friend,  falls  with  as  great 
force,  nay  jrreater,  on  Protestants,  I  will  read  the  following  extract, 
(p.  84.)  You  will  observe,  my  friends,  that  I  do  not  arraign  the  Me- 
thodists, as  immoral,  or  quote  their  discipline  from  insidious  motives ; 
hut,  to  show  that  our  practice  is  tmUtOed  in  a  way,  by  which  it  is  not 
tm|iroved,  but  liable  to  great  abuse ;  and  that  every  thing  that  is  said 
tgalnst  us,  may  be  said  against  others. 

Section  III*— "Qf  tkt  Band  Societies.  "  Two.  ikrm  or  four  traebelieTcrt,  who 
hate  collided  in  each  other,  form  &  band.— Only  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  in  one  of 
thrae  baadi,  all  nrntt  be  men,  or  all  women ;  and  all  married  or  all  nnmarried.*'  p.  83. 
*  Jtelet  af  fl«  Band  SoeisHem.**  •*  Tb«  daalgB  of  oar  ueeting  i^  to  obey  that 
esnpiaai  of  God.  Coolett  your  laulls  oaa  to  another,  and  pmy  one  for  aoothcj', 
that  V*  may  be  healed."  James,  ▼.  1$. 

••  S#iiie  of  the  questions  proposed  to  one-  before  he  it  admitted  among  as.  may 
"^J?  ***'•  ^/f^c***  P-  84.    ''I.*  Hare  you  the  fofgireness  of  your  iint?  (a  pret^ 

■fd  qneatbn,  my  friends  to  answer,  whea  the  ilfflfliare  assnrea  at,  Eoclca. 

u  1,  -  Man  knoweth  not  whether  he  be  worthy  of  lofe,  or  hatred;"  In  olh«r 


whether  he  hath,  or  hath  sot,  forgiveness  of  bin  sins.)    S."  Mas  no  sin, 

anwaid  or  outward,  dominion  over  you?  (What  scrutiny!)  6."  Do  you  desire 
to  be  told  of  vour  Hulls?  7.<»  Do  you  desire  to  be  told  of  ail  your  faults,  and 
that  plstn  ana  kmntf  !.•  Do  yon  desire  that  every  one  of  us  should  tt-ll  you 
from  tima  to  time,  whatsoever  is  in  our  heart,  conceminir  yoof  9.»  Coosidmr! 
lo  yo«  deaiie  we  ahoay  tell  yon  wknlaoevar  we  tfaaii,  whatsoever  wm  fear, 
whalioevcr  we  hear  concerainf  yoaT  ]0.*>  Do  you  dis'ie  that  in  doiiiff  this,  ifs 
"■'"■"'  aacloi©  as  |iossible.  thai  we  should  cuiU  the  qukk.  aiid  search 


fonr  heart  to  the  bottoral  !!.•  Is  it  your  desire  and  design  to  be  on  th.»  and 
all  other  occasions,  entirely  open,  so  as  to  ?peak  without  disguise,  and  without 
teservet  ^T  Any  of  the  preceding qaestions  may  be  a^ked  «  often  Mocca* 
lion  reouires:  the  four  following  at  every  meetioff.  85.    !.♦  What  known  sins 


tion  requires:  the  lour  loiiowing  ai  e^ery  mectioff.  a.  

Zm  jm  committed  since  our  l£rt  meetinrt  ^-V Whatj^iailar  ♦"-Ptetiooa 
iSZ  yon  met  withi  S.^  How  were  you  deliveredl  4.»  Whathaveyou  thougtit, 
•aid.  ir  done,  of  which  yon  doubt  whether  it  be  sin.  or  notT  ^.^^ 

Tkey  must  reveal  the  whole  soul  and  body,  inward  and  witwanl 
sins;  and  I  defy  roy  friend  to  quote  any  thing,  even  from  Smith  s 
Liffuori,  to  surpass  that.  In  the  Catholic  practice,  the  confession  is 
to  the  priest  alone ;  who  is  bound  by  holy  vows,  before  God  and  man, 
not  to  abuse  his  trust ;  and  it  Is  unheard  of,  that  a  priest  has  ever  vio- 
Isted  his  oath,  by  divulging  the  secrets  confided  to  his  ear,  as  the 
minister  of  the  sacrament.  But  tell  such  secrets  to  one  woman,  and, 
■a  the  witty  Frenchman  said,  when  asked  why  he  began  a  deed  with 
the  words,  *»  Know  one  woman,"  &c. :  "  Why,  if  one  woman  knows 
it,  it  is  equivalent  to  »*  all  men,"  for  they  will  all  know  it  soon  enouffli 
from  her.*'  (a  laugh.)  I  suspect,  that  my  opponent  also  suspects  by 
this  time,  that  he  has  got  into  a  pretty  badyix.  1  shall  be  amused  to 
see  how  he  will  ed  out  of  the  noose. 

Now,  my  friends,  I  have  advanced  Protestant  testimony,  to  show, 
either  that  the  champion  of  Protestantism  has  trodden  most  awfully 
upon  Protestants'  toes,  or  to  prove  that  the  Catholic  practice  of  con- 
fession is  not  immoral.     Did  time  permit,  I  might  cite  the  most  coa- 
vincing  testimony,  from  the  fathers  of  the  reformaUon,  and  from  tbe 
German  princes,  to  show,  that  when  the  restraints  of  the  confessional 
were  removed,  the  barriers  of  virtue  seemed  to  be  broken  down.     1  do 
not  choose  to  use  their  testimony  before  this  audience.    It  is  suffi- 
eiently  well  known,  and  it  follows  from  it,  that  my  opponent  ought 
not  to  speak  ill  of  confession ;  for  it  has  every  where  proved  itself  to 
be  a  useful  practice,  and  one  beneficial  to  society.    It  has  been  one  of 
the  most  remarkable  aids  to  justice,  in  cases  which  legal  process  could 
not  reach.    To  show  this,  I  will  relate  an  anecdote.    Some  one,  in 
New- York,  stole  a  quantity  of  silver  spoons,  and,  having  confessed 
the  crime  to  the  priest,  was  told,  that  neither  confession  nor  absol^on 
could  be  of  any  avail,  without  restitution  of  the  ill-gotten  goods.    Res- 
titution was  accordingly  made.     Here  is  a  fine  practical  comment  on 
the  subject.    The  pofice,  having  heard  of  the  affair,  insisted  that  the 
uriest  should  disclose  the  name  of  the  thief,  and  wished  to  compel  him 
to  do  so,  to  promote  thereby,  as  they  supposed  they  should  do,  the 
cauw  of  justice.    The  priest,  of  course,  refused  to  commit  a  flagrant 
breach  of  trust,  and  modestly  contended,  that  the  cause  of  justice  was 
much  more  effectually  promoted,  by  the  course  which  a  priest  m  such 
ease  pursued.     Restitution  had  been  made :   was  not  this  enough  I 
The  police  subpasnaed  him  to  appear  before  the  mayor  of  New-York, 
the  celebrated  De  Witt  Clinton,  who  decided  that  the  pnest  could  not 
be  compelled  to  give  up  the  name.    The  lawyer  employed  by^e 
priest,  was  Mr.  Sampson,  a  Protestant,  and  an  ornament  to  the  bar. 
He  reported  the  trial.     Before  reading  his  speech,  touching  on  this 
verv  topic  of  the  morality  or  immorality  of  auricular  confession,  hear 
the  admirable,  but  too  brief  preface,  he  has  prefixed  to  the  volume.    I 
»m  sure,  every  high-minded  and  honorable  man  heTe,^»»«J^«'„^^ 
testant  or  Catholic,  will  subscribe  cheeifully  to  his  sentiments.  "The 
genersl  saUsfectioo  given  to  every  religious  denomination,  by  the  d#- 


« 


lllli 

Sill 


WEBATM  cur  TME  * 

eitioi  of  this  interesanf  auettion,  is  well  ealcolatiNl  to  dissipate  anfi- 
fmltd  pi«|iidifMM  and  nfigimis  Jitloiiii«ai  and  tlM  rafMiner  fsela  m 
IMMB  iiiiaraisttoii  in  inaking  it  public  WImb  that  adjodicatioa 
iliall  \m  omnpavBd  with  the  baneful  atatnten  and  judgnMiita  in  Europe, 
iipOB  similar  8nbjects«  tbe  snperior  equltj  and  wisdom  of  American 
Jwrispfndence,  and  civil  orobity,  will  be  felt;  and  it  cannot  fail  to  \m 
well  received  lij  the  enughtened  and  Tirtuous  of  every  commanity, 
and  will  constitute  a  document  of  history,  precious  and  instructive  to 
tii«  present  and  future  jenerations."  Having  produced  before  thm 
mm%  a  book  called,  **  The  Papist  misrepresented,  and  truly  repre* 
■ented,**  and  lead  the  misrepresentation  first,  he  continoed  : 

"The  papitt  hrmfy  reprefmted,  belieres  it  datnnable  in  wij  rel%ioa  to  nwkc 
Ipdt  of  nwn.  liowever  he  fimiljr  holds,  that  when  Chritt  speaking  to  hit  apot- 
tM  MM,  John  xm,f2,  **  Reeeivt  y<  the  Holy  Ghost;  whose  aims  ymi  ihrnilj^ 
fiM,  ikmfmrejbrgivimi  and  wkosi  tim  ym  sluUi  retmm,  M«y  art  rstmmd;'* 
m  gMe  them,  aad  their  niccetaora,  the  bishops  and  prtesta  o(  the  Catholic 
«Kh,  authoritjr  to  absolve  anjr  truly  penitent  sinner  from  his  tins.  And  God 
iavinir  thus  rif en  them  Ike  mimutry  of  retmeiUaiiam^  and  made  tht  m  Chrigfg 
kgmtes,  t  Cor.  v.  18,  19.  20,  Chri$f§  mimMten  mnd  the  dispenstrs  ^  ih% 
m^eriet  of  Christ,  1  Cor.  ir.  and  fivei  them  power  that  whatsoever  Iktv 
mmad  o»  emrth  ahaU  be  loosed  in  heamm,  Mattt.  x»iii,  18,  he  undoubtedly  be- 
lijVii,  that  whoioeTer  comes  to  tbem,  maktnr  a  sincere  and  humble  confession 
of  bn  sint,  with  a  true  repentance  and  a  hrm  purpose  of  aniendnient,  and  • 
h«arly  resolution  of  toning  from  his  evil  ways,  may  from  them  receive  absoln- 
tiwi,  by  the  authority  given  them  from  heaven,  and  no  doubt  bnt  God  ratifies 
above  the  sentence  pronounced  in  that  tribunal;  loonng  in  heenen  wh^wevet 
m  lAiis  lomtd  by  them  •n  emHh.  And  that,  whosoever  comes  without  the  due 
jweparatbn,  without  a  repentance  from  the  bottom  of  hb  heart,  mod  real  intea. 
tjom  of  forsaking  his  sins,  receives  no  benefit  by  the  absolution;  but  addt  tia  to 
sin,  by  a  high  contempt  of  God's  mercy,  and  abuM  of  his  sacraments." 

^ :■"<>  wonder  then,  this  latter  being  the  true  character  of  confession,  if  the  bit* 

itiMi  eMtoiaa  of  the  Catholic  faith  have  still  respected  It;  aad  that  discerning 
■liMls  nave  acknowledged  the  many  benefits  society  might  practically  reap  from 
iS-JiSSnE***^  fawn  its  religious  character.  It  has,  I  dare  say,  been  oftenei 
aHa»ei  1^  aaicaani  than  by  good  sense.  The  gentleman  who  arf^ied  against 
nStjM  Ntpertad  himself  too  much  to  employ  that  weapon,  and  I  believe  he  hai 
iSlll  ai  that  good  sense  conk)  uigc  against  it,  which  we  take  in  very  good  part. 
Bat  while  thia  ordinance  has  been  openly  exposed  to  scoff  and  ndicule,  ila 
ezcelleoce  has  been  concealed  by  the  very  secrecy  it  enjoins.  If  it  led  to  liceo- 
S??*''**^*f  danger,  that  licentiousness,  or  that  danger,  would  have  come  to 
l%ht,  and  there  would  be  tongues  enough  to  tell  it.  Whilst  on  the  other  hand 
lis  utility  can  never  be  proved  by  instances,  becante  it  cannot  be  shown  how 
■May  have  been  saved  by  it:  how  many  of  the  young  of  both  seiea,  have  been 
m  tba  DMMt  critical  junctnro  of  their  lives,  admonished  from  the  commlaiion  of 
ma  iilal  eruie,  that  wooM  have  brought  the  parents*  hoary  hairs  with  sorrow 
to  *•  g«»«.    The«!  are  secrets  that  cannot  be  revealed. 

Since  however,  the  avennet  that  lead  to  vke  are  many  aad  alluring,  is  it  not 
Will  mat  some  one  should  be  open  to  the  repenting  sinner,  where  the  fear  of 
nanisbment  and  of  tbe  world's  scorn,  nay  not  deter  the  yet  wavering  convertt 
m  tbe  road  to  dratrnction,  is  easy  and  laiooth,  tiJiuM*  descensus  evemt,  may 
It  not  consist  wuh  wisdom  and  policy,  that  tbeie  be  one  silent,  secret  path,  where 
thfdoobting  MHant  nay  be  invited  to  turn  aside,  and  escape  the  tbronr  that 
»■■■"■■■ " ^•— '  alO'njt'    ®~—--  — .*— *  —u^ ^_  :_  *»._  I •-*  _  L^i__  r^     •. 


BOXAN   CATHOMC    REIIGION. 


237 


«Aii^  *£      ,-■  j"**"/.  .Some  retreat,  where,  as  in  the  boion  of  a  holy  hermit, 

Wimin  tbe  tliada  of  innocence  and  peace,  tbe  pilrrim  of  this  checqncred  lifm, 
any  dimw  new  inspifalions  of  virtue  and  repose. 

If  the  thousand  waya  of  error,  are  tricked  with  flowers,  is  it  lo  wrong,  that 
toncwhera  there  ihould  be  a  sure  and  gentle  friend,  who  has  no  interest  to  be^ 
tray,  nocara,  bnt  that  of  ministering  to  the  incipient  curet  The  syren  songs  and 


^  ilahments  of  pleasure,  may  lead  the  young  and  tender  heart  astray,  and  the 
repulsive  Irown  of  stern  authority.  Ibrbid  return.  One  step  then  gained  or  lost, 
*  vKloryor  death.    IM  mm  then  mk  you  that  are  parents,  whM:h  wonM  yos 

pfenr,  tint  the  child  of  your  hopes  should  purma  the  couiic  of  rain,  and  con- 


tinue with  the  companions  of  debacch  and  crime,  or  tire  to  the  confession^, 
wberv  if  compunction  could  once  bring  him.  one  genlle  word,  one  wtll  timed 
admonition,  one  friendly  turn  by  tbe  band,  might  save  your  child  irom  ruin,  and 
your  heart  from  unavailing  sorrow?  And  if  the  hardened  sinner,  the  murderer, 
thta  robber,  or  conspirator,  can  once  be  brought  to  bow  his  stubborn  spirit,  and 
kneel  before  his  frail  fellow  man.  bvite  him  to  pronounce  a  penaucc  »a»t«^^o 
hia  eriaies,  aad  seek  salvation  through  a  full  repentance,  there  w  more  gained, 
than  by  the  bloodiest  spectacle  of  terror,  than  though  his  mangled  luubs  were 
broken  on  the  wheel,  his  body   gibbeted  or  given  to  the  fowls  of  the  air.    U 
these  reflections  have  any  weight  at  all;  il"  this  picture  be  but  true,  in  any  part, 
better  forbear  and  leave  things  as  they  are.  than  too  rashly  sacrifice  to  lealoua 
doubts,  or  shallow  ridicule,  an  ordinance  sanctioned  by  antiquity  and  founded 
on  eiperience  of  roan's  nature.    For  if  it  were  possible  for  even  faith,  that  re 
noves  mountains,  as  they  say.  to  alter  this,  and  with  it  to  abolish  tbe  whole 
fabric,  of  which  it  is  a  vital  part,  what  next  would  follow  ?   Hundreds  .o«  oullions 
of  christians  would  be  set  adrift  from  all  relig^ious  fastening!  Would  it  be  better 
to  have  so  many  atheists,  than  so  many  christians  I  P""/ "o^'^.^^f.*  chu^h  is  fit- 
ted to  receive  into  its  bosom,  this  great  majority  of  all  the  chnstmn  world  ?    Is 
it  determined  whether  they  shall  become  Jews  or  Philanthropists.  Chinese  or 
Mahoniroedans,  Lutherans,  or  Calvinists.  Baptists  or  Brownist*.  MatenalisU, 
UniversalisU  or  Destructionists.  Arians,  Trinitarians.  Presbyterians.  Baxtenans, 
Sabbatarians.  Millennarians, Moravians,  Aotinomians  or  Sandeinanians,  Jumpers, 
or  Dunkers.  Shakers  or  Quakers.  Burgers.  Kirkers.  Independents.  Covenauters. 
Ptairitans.  Hutchisonians.  Johnsonians,  or  Muggletonians.     I  doubt  not  that  in 
every  sect  that  I  have  named,  there  are  good  men,  and  if  there  be,  '  tru»t  tney 
will  find  mercy,  but  chiefly  so  as  they  are  charitable,  each  to  h»  neighbor.    And 
why  should  they  be  otherwise?    The  gospel  enjoins  it;  the  constitution  ordains 
It.     Intolerance  in  this  country  could  proceed  from  nothing  but  a  d  iseased  aflec- 
tion  of  the  nta  mater,  or  the  spleen."     Catholic  Question  m  America,  p.  87. 

I  will  now  dismiss  the  question  of  confession.  There  are  many  things 
to  which  I  should  like  to  give  answers,  in  set  speeches ;  hot,  whoever 


„ my  tnena  numedly 

him,  for  his  occasional  hoarseness  of  voice. 

When  my  worthy  opponent  stated,  in  his  long-blazoned  proposition, 
«  She  is  the  man  of  sin,"  I  imagined  that  he  meant  no  more  than  the 
©xcitinff  of  an  innocuous  laugh  at  the  expense  of"  Mothee  Church, 
by  making  a  man  of  her  in  her  old  age.  How  great,  then,  has  been 
my  surprise,  to  see  him,  all  sail  set,  dash  headlong  upon  this  rock  of 
commentators,  the  "infames  scopulos  interpretum,  'around  which  are 
scattered  in  profusion,  the  wrecks  of  so  many  learned  lucubraUons,  for 
the  last  1800  years !  Catholics  and  Protestants,  churchmen  and  lay- 
men, ancients  and  moderns,  Papias  and  Newton,  and  last,  not  least, 
Mr.  Alexander  Campbell,  have  all  egregiously  foundered  upon  this 

hidden  shoal  of  controversy.  j  *i.  .  r.  i  • 

No  wonder,  the  learned  Protestant,  Scaliger,  observed  tfiat  Calvin 
was  wise,  in  not  writing  upon  the  Apocalypse.  "  Saputt  Calmmu,  quia 
in  Jpocalwmn  nan  acritmi  /"  Had  we  a  congregation  of  scary  old 
women,  instead  of  intelligent  and  sensible  men,  around  us,  1  should 
expect  to  be  looked  at  by  many  a  prying  eye,  confident  of  seeing  ont^ 
mt  least  of  the  ten  horns,  sprouting,  or  already  strong,  full-grown,  and 
threateningly  prominent  from  my  forehead.  But  as  1  address  reaso- 
ners,  not  visibnaries,  nor  rhapsodists,  nor  fanatics,  I  must  reason, 
leavinir  to  my  fanciful  friend,  the  regions  of  imaginaUon,  into  whicii 
he  has'flown,  far  above  my  reach.— I  would  not  fetch  him  too  hastily 
down,  hut  by  sending  a  few  arguments,  at  respectful  distances  alter 
one  anoUier  to  pluck  a  feather  now,  and  a  feather  then  from  his  wings. 


,TE  on  TBM 


w  may  fetch  hlin  smlel|,  and  alowly,  and  with  diffiiity  hack  again  to 

th»i.:aypiihwMi0n  of  logic,  an«l  common  senne.  Am«  afs  the  we»» 
pmrn  with  whish  I,  in  the  irat  place,  proceed  to  grapple  with  the 
gentleman. 

lal.  Is  he  an  infallible  f  He  pretenda  not,  veillT,  to  h«  aneh. 
Then  what  is  all  his  fanciful  theory  worth  1  It  is  based  on  reason  and 
iialory,  is  it!  Well  but  llug:o  Grotius,  and  Hammond,  and  Dr. 
Hemit  Thorodike,  not  to  mention  fifW  others,  of  different  leUffiona 
denominations,  but  all  Protestants,  and  at  least  as  good  biblical  and 
classical  scholars,  as  m  learned  antagonist,  hare  ridiculed  the  notion 
Hi  calliif  the  pope  of  Rome  Antichrist !  If  only  one  learned  and 
fieiw  PMeatiiit  weie  pitted  against  my  friend,  I  would  be  eren 
with  him,  or  more  than  even.— How  much  superior  in  this  argument, 
when  I  hare  so  many  wise  men  on  my  side,  while  all  the  monoma- 
ibes  are  on  his  !  *«  i«el  them  not  lead  people  by  the  nose,'**  says  Thorn- 
iikiBi  **  to  beUem  they  emt  prove  their  mwposition  that  the  pope  i»  mnH" 
cArtfl,  mnd  the  Fmneta,  Momiemf  when  they  cannot  '*  Thus  the  most 
learned  and  orthoaox  Protestant  divines  cannot  subscribe  to— they  are, 
on  the  contrary,  ashamed  of^this  interpretation  of  my  learned  opponent* 

ind*  Those  Protestants,  who  agree  with  him  in  calling  the  pope, 
antlchfist,  disagroe  as  to  the  particular  pope  to  be  so  called,  ana  still 
more,  as  to  the  time  when  the  downfall  of  Babylon  was  to  have  taken 
place,  or  is  to  take  place— as  in  the  case  of  the  Jewish  testimony 
against  Jesus  Christ,  there  is  no  agreement  among  the  witnesses. 
Bnanbom  confidently  asserts  that  the  popish  antichrist  was  born  in 
the  year  86 ;  that  he  grew  to  his  full  size  m  376 ;  that  he  was  at  his 
greatest  strength  in  636;  that  he  began  to  decline  in  1086;  that  lie 
wouM  die  in  1640 ;  and  that  the  world  would  end  in  1711.  (Bayle  Art. 
Braunbom^  bisho|>  Newton,  Napper,  Fleming,  Beza,  Melancthon,  Bnl* 
lager,  had  all  their  peculiar  and  conflicting  theories,  and  none  of  them, 
we  may  safely  assert,  has  found  the  Apocalyptic  key.  Turien,  Alix  and 
X0lt|  lie  in  nothing  more  wise,  and  equally  unsuccessful. 

Sd.  The  scripture  is  opposed  to  him.  For  St,  John  says,  1st  En. 
eh.  3.  ▼.  M,  **  'fhat  the  liar  who  denieth  Jesus  to  be  the  Christ  is 
antichrist'*  Now  this,  the  pope  has  neyer  done ;  but,  on  the  con- 
trary,  he  contends  earnestly  for  tiie  faith  in  the  divinity  of  Christ,  one* 
delivered  to  the  saints. 

4th.  Chnrch  history  is  opposed  to  him.  For  it  shews,  at  everi 
page,  how  the  pope  sent  missionaries  into  every  part  of  the  world 
even  the  most  distant,  to  gather  barbarous  nations  into  the  fold  ot 
Christ,  to  preach  to  them  salvation  through  his  blood.  Now  acconl- 
bf  to  the  rale  of  the  Savior,  *«a  kingdom,  divided  against  itself, 
Muinot  stand.**  And  it  is  unheard  of  among  all  the  signs  of  the  anti- 
christ, that  he  was  to  be  the  strenuous,  and  for  many  eenturies,  the 
only  apostle  of  the  true  Christ,  the  Savior.  Even  the  worst  pope, 
was  true  to  doctrine,  and  made  the  beams  of  the  sun  of  righteousnese, 
df  puffe,  christian  laith,  gild  the  villages  of  Tartary  and  cheer  the 
iwnng  horde  i  in  its  deserts. 

6th.    My  friend  is  opposed  to  himself;  for  he  said  to  day,  that  the 

■mm  of  the  little  horn  signified  wisdom  and  knowledge.    Now  as  the 

Catholic  church  is  the  mother  of  ignorance,  the  vicUm  of  blind  and 

lidiculous  superstitions,  the  cause  of  all  the  obscurity  of  the  dark 

ages,  she  cannot  be  the  antichrist    Again  its  mouth  indicated  elo- 


BOHAN  CATHOUC    SELIGIOIT. 


239 


quence,  was  eloquent-^Then  my  opponent  is,  himself,  the  beast,  for 
his  speech  was  truly  eloquent  Indeed  the  ingenuity  with  which  he 
dressed  up  even  the  old  story  of  "  she  is  fallen,  the  mighty  Babylon, 
the  great  harlot,  which  corrupted  the  earth — Allelujah,  Allelujah  !'* 
is  proof  positive  that  he  would,  by  his  comntand  of  ianguage,  deceive,  if 
pmihle^  even  the  elect  into  the  belief,  that  he  had  succeeded,  where 
80  many  had  failed,  in  breaking  the  seal  of  the  mysterious  volume* 
He  has  clearly  put  the  lion  in  a  net  and  not  so  much  as  a  mouse 
durst  approach,  to  gnaw  a  hole,  to  let  him  out 

6th.  He  is  opposed  to  Catholics.  For  they  have  been  wont  to  ap* 
ply  the  words  ot  St  John,  just  before  he  speaks  of  the  antichrist  to 
the  Protestant  sects,  which,  ther  conceive,  are  fast  hastening  into  the 
arms  of  the  Unitarians,  who  deny  the  divinity  of  Christ.  "  They 
went  out  from  us ;  but  they  were  not  of  us ;  for  if  they  had  been  of 
us,  they  would,  no  doubt  have  remained  with  us,  but  that  they  may 
be  manifest  that  they  are  not  all  of  us."  I  have  already  said  some- 
thing of  the  "  monster,"  not  merely  "  beast*'  but  **  monster,"  which 
my  friend  attempted,  like  Prometheus,  to  form  and  steal  fire  from 
heaven  to  animate,  that  he  might  call  it  •*  Apostolic  Protestantism." 
ITiis,  in  our  estimation,  may  be  found  to  possess,  some,  at  least  of 
the  characteristics  of  the  Apocaljrptic  beast  But  we  should  beg  leave 
to  baptise  it  *♦  Polypos"  or  "  Legion."  We  could  very  satisfac- 
torily shew  that  it  has  made  war  on  the  saints,  and  devoured  them 
by  thousands,  not  to  say  millions ;  that  a  portion  of  the  beast  so  detains, 
even  now,  when  liffht  from  heaven  is  breaking,  millions  of  the  saints, 
of  those  who  for  the  Confession  of  Jesus  Christ  and  for  eonscituce 
mke  are  reduced  to  a  galling  servitude,  a  poverty,  and  a  degradation, 
far  worse  than  the  lot  of  the  negro,  of  the  southern  rice-fields. 

My  friend  began  by  observing  that  symbolical  language  gives  great 
scope  for  the  imagination.  It  sets  us  adrift  upon  a  sea  of  speculation. 
Is  he  r^y  to  embark  upon  that  sea  1  Are  his  sails  trimmed !  Is  his 
compass  ready  1  If  the  sad  experience,  to  which  I  have  alluded,  has 
not  disinclined  him  to  the  voyage,  I  assure  him  that  he  will  find  it  to 
eventuate  like  that  of  the  three  wise  men  of  Gotham,  whom  our  illus- 
trious compatriot  Washington  Irving,  sent  to  sea  in  a  bowl.  We  may 
drift  with  every  wind,  and  current  through  a  thousand  perils,  on  this 
wide  ocean  of  imaeination.  But  my  friends,  what  has  miaginaiion  to 
do  with  this  question  t  She  is  a  very  p^ood  slave,  but  a  very  bad  mis- 
tress. Give  me  full  scope  with  your  imagination  and  I  can  prove  to 
you  any  thing  and  every  thing,  until  we  all  are  like  the  novel  and  ro- 
mance writers  of  the  present  day — "tn  fancy  ripe,  in  reason  rotten,^ 
Novels  and  romances  are,  confessedly,  works  of  fiction.  They  are  not 
npected  to  contain  reason,  and  therefore  they  escape  censure*  But 
when  men  pretend  to  pass  off  their  day-dreams  for  the  oracles  of  Hea 
▼en,  they  should  remember  the  law  of  Deuteronomy,  xiv.  5,  "  /U<  tht 
Prophet  and  forger  ff  dreamt  shall  be  slain,"*^  and  it  tney  tear  not  even 
the  fate  of  the  false  seer,  at  least  they  should  apprehend  the  lash  ot 
criticism  and  ridicule.  I  know  in  this  ^ood  city,  a  respectable  dame, 
who  is  not  a  Catholic,  but  who  has  written  a  ream  of  paper  on  the 
Apocalyptic  visions.  I  suggest  to  my  friend  that  he  may  possibly  ga 
ther  additional  light  on  the  subject  by  comparing  notes  with  her.  She 
has  made  it  the  study  of  years,  and  on  one  occasion,  as  I  am  credibly 
informed,  under  the  influence  of  the  text's  inspiration,  she  came  into 


9411 


dhuitb  oif  ma 


JtUJCAM    CATHOLIC    RKUOION. 


241 


Pill 
1 


I 


ihpffeli,  Willi  tiio  11111,  mooiif  and  stais  pictontd  upon  her  ffrois,  tnil 
lf|ilii|r  beiwfttli  li«r  foot  m  the  solemnly  moTod  through  the  aiolo. 
Ton,  tlrv  may  have  aoriKissed  thia  lady  in  oloqaence,  thoo^  of  thai  I 
am  not  aoite  tare,  bnf,  certainly,  iho  waa  a  mateh  for  you,  in  imagina- 
tion. My  friend  obaenred  that  the  aiin  would  go  down,  it  would  take 
Ua  a  wholt  daj,  to  ahew  the  audience  the  raHmmk  of  the  conceit  with 
Which  he  haa  nvored  us — I  coald  not  help  aasenting  to  the  gentle- 
tnan^s  remark,  and  atiying,  in  my  mind,  that  it  waa  even  ao— nay,  that 
it  woald  take  365  days,  before  he  coold  shew  that  there  waa  anything 
In  it  that  was  reasonahle. 

Southey  obnerves  that  the  **  Romish  cbuich  was,  in  the  worst  of 
limes,  KowtTKR  depiled,  the  salt  or  tsi  earth,  the  sole  oohsirta* 
Trrt  patitciPLE,  bt  which  Eitropi  was  sated  prom  the  lowest  and 
BI08T  brutal  barbarism  ;*^  and  yet  in  the  Tery  face  of  this  reluctant 
trihute,  hy  a  firsi-rate  Protestant  historian,  Mr.  Campbell  labora 
to  denonetrale  that  thia  ▼enrehureh  waa  Anti-Christ!  He  places 
lier  on  the  Mediterranean,  although  it  is  a  weary  ride  before  you  reach 
lier  aplendld  domes  and  OTerlaaling— maugre  the  liquify ingr— hills,  on 
whicfi  she  sits,  in  humble,  if  in  aueenly  majesty.  The  Tiber,  like  its 
namesake  in  the  district,  instead  of  being  called  ft  tea,  may  well  be 
ealled  a  "  Gwm  ereek^*  now. 

My  friend^a  Lexicography,  leonismt  and  Synchronisma,  mutt  hare 
m  ipaated  for  argument  atronp  aa  the  rock  of  Gibraltar,  in  his  own 
opinion.  It  is  unanswered  and  unanswerable.  He  saya  that  God  al- 
ways by  a  beaat,  meana  some  monster  or  other.  Then  Jesus  Christ 
miMl  be  •tome  monster  or  other,'  for  what  is  the  cry  of  Hearen's  Ju- 
Mlw  «t  the  end  of  all  thingal  ^^  Behold  the  ^Lion'  tfihe  tribe  ^Judah 
l«ll  «m>fflf/«lf''  and  apin— *«  Worthy  was  the  Lamb  that  was  slain," 
In,  IMS.  My  friend  would  m&ke  a  strange  havoc  with  the  language 
and  imagery  of  heaven— a  curious  monster  of  a  Lamb  and  a  Lion,  than 
which  notwithstanding  all  he  has  said,  I  will  force  him  to  confess  that 
there  can  be  nothing,  as  there  is  nothing,  more  beantiful  than  this  en- 
tire passage.  The  Evangelists  are  represented  in  the  vision  of  Ei«- 
kM  at  Beasts  and  Birds  of  prey.  Are  they  too  Anti-Christs  !  Eng- 
liii  has  elMMOn  the  Rampant  and  Roaring  Lion  for  her  emblem.  My 
IHend  baa  piaited  and  diapfaiaed  her.  What  portion  of  Anti-Christ, 
of  the  wtrnn  of  tin,  h§kef  She  has  persecnted — and  I  might  with  far 
more  truth  aay  to  her,  what  the  martyred  Robert  Emmett  said  to  Lord 
Moibiiry,  **fan  the  innocent  blood  your  ladytkip  km  ahed  could  be  col- 
keted  tfilo  Mf  mreai  reservoir,  ymr  Lad^pMp  mSgit  twim  in  ii,^  My 
friend  apoke  of  Elitabeth'a  long  life.  He  did  not  aay  of  how  many 
Jpaara  ahe  abridged  the  life  of  the  ••  JWr  Queen  /  fiboto."  Politically, 
tniellectnaUY,  and  morally,  Rome,  or  if  you  will,  the  papacy  was  the 
Savior  of  Eurooe,  as  all  hiatoriana  ajreo.  How,  llien,  could  ahe  bo 
ilie  •  Beast  !•  It  ia  prepofteroua.  Why  all  this  haa  been  prophesied 
mm  ftlailM,  anil  piopheaiod  and  IklaUled  again.  Forty,  or  fifty  yean 
•!!>»«•  iif  wwfiiilo  fHond  there  (Rer.  Mr.  Badin,  the  firat  prieat  or- 
dtaiued  In  the  United  States)  etn  inform  you,  almanaes  were  published 
in  Kentucky,  stating  the  precise  day  and  minute,  when  the  Hallelujah 
was  to  be  intoned  for  the  Downfall  of  Babylon  !  The  day  haa  passed, 
and  what  of  it!  I  have  got  a  book  here,  which  makee  Napoleon  Bo- 
naparte  the  man  of  sin.  Bom  on  an  Island,  in  the  Mediterranean, 
C^fiilei,  deriving  his  power  fiom  the  French  ReroloUon,  wMch  afieel! 


ed  to  emsb  Christianity,  I'lnlaiiie;  which  substituted  decadi  for  Sa> 
oath ;  prolaiied  templea:  adored  a  vile  woman  in  the  temple  of  God, 
Imiiiolatod  and  expatriated  thoosanda  upon  thousands  of  priests,  and 
hoped  that  the  last  of  kings  might  be  strangled  with  the  viscera  of  the 
last  of  priests:  plucked  Piua  VII.  from  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  drag- 
ged the  saints,  the  venerable  monks  by  their  beards,  from  the  horns  of 
the  altar,  &c.  &c.  The  Apocalypse  is  a  sealed  book,  which  Crod  haa 
not  vouchsafed  to  unfold  to  man.  Better  practise  what  we  do  know, 
with  certainty,  of  his  adorable  will,  rather  than  blaspheme  what  we  do 
not  understand.  Meanwhile,  if  ever  there  was  made  a  plausible  appli- 
cation of  this  mysterious  prophecy,  behold  it  in  the  rise,  progrress,  and 
errest  of  Mahommedanism.  The  sea,  or  lake,  the  year  666,  the  war 
on  Christ  and  the  saints ;  the  sword  and  Koran ;  the  watch-word  Be- 
lieve or  die,  the  conspiracy  of  Christendom  during  the  crusades  tr. 
check  its  power,  the  gloriously  disastrous  battle  of  Lepanto,  the  pre- 
sent crippled,  but  still  formidable  state  of  Islamism,  all  pictured  so 
vividly  aa  almost  to  convince  us  that  we  have  surely  discovered  the 
object  of  the  prediction.  Let  us  read  from  Waddington.  I  shall  make 
a  few  brief  pauses  which  yon  will  fill  up  by  appropriate  reflections. 
How  few  have  understood  the  appallin?  dangers  that  this  civil  and 
religious  despotism  of  the  Impostor  of  Mecca,  threatened,  during  so 
many  ages,  to  Christianity  and  the  world  ! 

•*Tiic  leveoth  century  wai  marked  by  the  birth  of  a  n«w  and  resolute  adver- 
lary,  who  began  his  career  with  the  most  stupendous  triumphs,  who  has  torn 
from  ut  the  possession  of  half  the  world,  and  who  retains  his  conquests  even  to 
this  moment.  Mahomet  was  bom  about  the  year  570;  we  are  ignorant  of  the  pre- 
cise period  of  the  nativity  of  that  man  who  wrought  the  most  extraordinaiy  re- 
volution in  the  afiairs  of  this  globe,  which  the  agency  of  aov  being  merely  hu- 
maa  has  ever  yet  accomplished.  His  pretended  mission  did  not  commence  till 
he  was  about  forty  years  old,  and  the  date  of  his  celebrated  flight  from  Mecca, 
tfM  Hedjirah,  or  era  of  Mahometan  nations,  is  622,  A.  D.  The  remainder  of  hit 
life  was  spent  in  establishing  his  religion  and  his  authority  in  his  native  land,  Ara- 
bht;  and  the  sword  with  which  he  finally  completed  that  purpose,  he  bequeathed, 
for  the  unirertal  propagation  of  both,  to  his  followers.  His  commission  was 
aealously  executed ;  and,  in  less  than  a  centunr  after  his  death,  his  faith  waa  an- 
interrnptedly  extended  by  a  chain  of  nations  from  India  to  the  Atlantic 

The  fate  of  Fenm  was  decided  by  the  battle  of  Cadesia,  in  636.  Tn  Svria. 
Damaacnt  had  already  fellea,  and  after  the  sanKuinary  conflkt  of  Yermuk,  waeni 
the  Saracens  for  the  first  time  encountered  and  ov«:rtihrew  a  christian  eoemv  the 
conquerors  instantly  proceeded  to  the  reduction  of  Jerusalem;  that  grand  reli- 
gious triumph  they  obtained  in  637.  In  the  year  followiiM;  Aleppo  and  Aoti- 
och  fell  into  their  hands,  which  completed  the  conquest  of  Syria.  Thence  they 
proceeded  northward  at  fiir  at  the  tkorei  of  the  Euxine  and  the  neighborhood  of 
CuBttantinople. 

The  invasion  of  Egypt  took  place  in  6SS,and  within  the  apace  of  three  year*, 
Ike  whole  of  that  populous  province  wat  in  pottettioo  of  the  infidels.  Alexan- 
dria wai  the  last  city  which  fell;  and  in  tomewkat  more  than  a  century  after  the 
eipubion  of  philosophy  from  Europe  by  a  christian  legislator,  the  schools  of 
Alrica  were  closed  in  their  turn  by  the  annt  of  aa  vnlettered  Mahometan. 

The  MOGcat  of  the  Saracens  was  not  incontiderably  promoted  by  the  religiout 
diiteatioas  of  ^ir  ehrittian  advenariet.  A  vast  number  of  heretics  who  had 
been  oppressed  and  stigmatised  by  edicts  and  eouncib  were  scattered  over  the 
surface  of  Asia;  and  these  were  contented  to  receive  a  foreign  master,  of  whoia 

Ehnciples  they  were  still  ijraorant,  in  the  place  of  a  tyrant  whose  injustice  they 
ad  experienced.  But  in  Egypt,  especially,  the  whole  mass  of  the  native  popula- 
tion was  unfortuoatelv  involved  in  the  Jacobite  hereav;  and  few  at  that  time 
were  foHnd,  except  the  resident  Greeks,  who  adhered  to  the  doctrines  of  the 
church.  The  followers  of  Eutyches  formed  an  immediate  alliance  with  the  sol- 
diers of  Mahomet  against  a  Catholic  prince;  and  they  considered  that  there  was 
aothinf  unnatural  in  that  act,  since  they  hoped  to  secure  for  themselves,  under  a 
V  16 


^1 


■ 


OH 

I,  tl«  toktalloa  wkiok  hid  hmm  ninwd  hf  m  ortliodoi  goverameat 
W»  tlMili  MMfffc,  liow«v«r,  tlMAtkit  hm,  Hm  prelwit  oTliMiriltiertioii,  'W« 
villi.  nMBf  'iii«  rapEcttioii  <»f  tii«ir  aalicsi  tbtt  besidfts  th«  raoolketion  of  wroagt 
•ad  the  desire  to  escape  or  reveife  thtSt  t^ej  were  iaflaoMd  u  furiously  m 
their  poffMcntors  by  that  narrow  i«ctanu  •piril,  which  islcoiiiflioiilj  excited 
■iMt  kc«nlj  whme  the  differeacet  are  moat  trilling;  isd  which,  wfaik  it  axaggt 
ntad  tha  liaaa  'fh«t'  acfianited  them  from  Ihair  fellow  chriitiaM.  Miadad  tfaam  tr 
tha  linad  aalf  which  divided  all  alike  from  the  infidel. 


riMtt  IgY'iil,  tha  iMinpapw  niih«l  aloa|;  the  aotthtn  ihora  of  A%icatj  mm 
thoofh  'their  profvaaa  ii'thit  direction  was  lotermplad  1^  tha  doniettic  ditica 
tiont  of  the  prophet's  &nilljr,  eveii  more  than  hr  tha  occational  visor  of  tbi 
duristians.  tbej  were  in  pomtisbii  of  Carthage  oefoiv  the  end  of  the  seventl 
cantiitT.  Thance  ther  inticaadad  wastward,  aad  after  encou nteriac  •ona  oppo 
iition  m>m  the  native  Moors,  little  either  Irom  the  Greek  or  Vandal  mastert  oi 
thaciwnlrjr,  thej  completed  their  conquests  in  the  year  709. 

Hitherto  the  Mahometans  had  gained  no  footinr  in  Europe;  and  it  maj  seen 
•Craaga  that  the  most  western  of  its  provinces  should  have  bHcen  that  which  w» 
fill  npiMad  to  their  occupation.    Bat  the  vicinitj  of  Spain  to  their  latest  coo 
ilpiiH,  aad  tha  fiM:tioas  dissentions  of  its  oobility^gava  them  an  earij  opportv 
Iha  subjugation  ot  that  country.    TaairsnccaM  waa  almost  naa* 
In  711  they  overthrew  the  Gothic  monarchy  bf  tha  victory  of 
&iai|;«Ml  'tha  two  Ibilowtng  yean  ware  a nlficiant  to  taoira  their  dO'minion  over 
thanailaat  'part  of  the  peninsnk. 

lib  waters  of  this  torrent  were  destined  to  proceed  still  a  little  further.  Ten 
jpaars  afler  tha  battle  of  Xeres,  the  Saracens  crossed  the  I^reneea  and  overran 
with  little  opposition  the  southwestern  provinces  of  Franca — *  tha  vineyards  of 
Gaacony  and  the  city  Bourdeaux  were  possessed  by  tha  sovereign  of  Daroas- 
aad  Samarcaad;  and  the  south  of  France,  iVom  the  mouth  of  the  Garonne  to 


Ihat  nf  the  Rhone,  assumed  the  manners  and  religion  of  Arabia.*  Still  dissaUsfied 
with  thoae  amole  limits,  or  impatient  of  anv  limit,  these  children  of  the  desert 
agpia  aMurched  forward  into  the  centre  of  tna  kingdom.  They  were  aacaaipad 
between  Tours  and  Poictiers,  when  Charles  Martel,  the  mayor,  or  dnke  of  tha 
Franks,  encountered  them.  It  is  too  much  to  assert  that  th«  fate  of*  sristianity 
dapiaded  upon  the  result  of  the  battle  which  followed;  but  if  victc  y  had  da- 
mrad  §m  Iha  Saracens,  it  woald  probably  have  secured  to  them  in  rranca  tha 
nnia  ailent,  peffaape  the  saaM  dnratioa,  of  authority  which  they  possessed  ia 
Spain.  Next  taey  would  have  carried  the  horrors  of  war  and  Islamism  IntoGcr- 
■lanjr  or  Britain;  but  there,  other  fields  most  have  baaa  fought,  against  nations  of 
warriors  as  brave  as  the  Franks,  by  an  invader  who  was  becoming  lets  power- 
ill  aad  even  less  enthusiastic,  as  he  advaacad  fiuther  from  the  head  of  his  resour- 
caaaad  his  faith."  Waddington'a  Church  Hist,  pugr  135.  New  York  edit.  l«35. 

Thit  is  IIm  tynnay  mm  which  the  pope  has  saved  os,  and  for  it 
«i¥iliiatiiiii  and  nligion  owe  him  a  debt  which  they  will  oerer  b« 
able  to  repay. 

My  opponent  ran  a  parallel  between  pagan  and  Catholic  Rome. 
Buss  he  not  know  that  the  pagan  religion  borrowed  many  of  its  es- 
iiiitial  rit«a,  and  not  a  few  of  Its  forms,  from  the  indistanet  kaowl- 
•dfn  of  a  primaiy  vevelatlon  made  to  Adam  and  to  the  patriaraha, 
and  aHerwarda  from  the  written  law  I  And  might  I  not  mn  a  raon 
pilbet  parallel  between  the  Catholic  and  the  Jewish  institutions, 
while  the  latter  was  Dmiii  I  The  Catholics  haye  a  Pontifex  Maxi 
■ms,  or  High  Priest;  so  had  the  Jews.  The  Catholics  hsTe  a  church 
to  guide  the  people ;  the  Jews  had  a  synagogue  for  the  same  purpose. 
The  Cathnlies  have  a  famous  temple,  to  whose  doctrine  and  worship 
■Hmusteonform;  so  had  the  Jews.  The  Catholic  pontiff  enjoTs  some 


by  the  lustral  water,  emblematical  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  of 

me  power  and  merey  which  ean  cleanse  the  stains  of  the  conscience, 
••Tliou  Shalt  sf  -inkle  me,  0  Lord,  with  hyssop,  and  I  shall  be  cleans* 


4. 


MIllAlf  CATSOUC   SBUOION. 

•d,  thou  sliall wash IM| and  1  shall  hnsMde  whiisr  than 
Tid  also  said,  "Thou  ahalt  sprinkle  me,  O  Lord,  with  hyssop,  and  I 
shall  he  cleansed ;  thon  shalt  wash  me,  and  1  shall  be  nrade  whiter 
than  snow.*'    The  Catholics  have  nuns;  so  had  the  Jews  nuns,  liks 


Ihe  name  of  the  Catholic  church.    The  title  that  the  pope 

^  wervut  $ervorum  Jkif*^  servant  of  the  servants  of  Clod.    The 

if  Luther,  Dioclesian,  Julian,  of  the  true  God,  himself,  could  be  made 

to  tally  with  the  numbers  666— see  Robinson's  Calmet,  p.  71.    I 

eould  take  letters  out  of  the  name  of  Alkxandib  Camfbku.  to  mean 

the  same  thing. 

Ma.  Campbell. — ^If  you  can,  I  will  give  op  the  argument.  (▲ 
langh). 

Bishop  Purcell.— What  language  must  it  be  !    Hebrew,  SyiiM, 
Greek,  Latin  or  English!    No  matter.    £  is  in  some  languagt 
SOO — L  is  50. — 

Ma.  Campbill.»-You  have  not  yet  learned  the  numeral  alphabet. 

Bishop  Pitrcell. — I  cannot  make  the  sum  bioht  orr,  but  have  a 
little  patience  with  me  and  I  will  pay  you  all.  (A  laugh.— The  au- 
dience having  composed  themselves  at  the  request  of  the  Moderators, 
Bishop  Purcill  proceeded.)  Thus,  jrou  see,  my  friends,  the  name  of 
my  friend  helps  us  in  this  matter,  for  it  is  the  name  of  a  man,  and  the 
name  of  a  beast,  too,  with  a  hunch  on  its  back,  when  we  can  find  tha 
lacking  numerals  to  deeijpher  him.  He  has  made  a  certain  admissisn, 
tdter  Imviuflr  denied  it  all  the  week,  that  the  aposUes  founded  tiie  aee 
of  Rome.  This  shows  that  the  truth  will  prevail,  and  that  my  friend 
will  laugh  in  his  sleeve  at  you,  if  you  believe  all  his  fanciful  and  ro- 
■umcing  conjectures  about  the  man  of  mh*  Again— another  contra- 
diction. If  all  that  blood  is  to.  he  shed,  in  the  exarchate  of  Raven 
na,  we  are  here,  in  Ohio,  and  safe  enough  from  the  danger  under  om 
happy  constitution.— We  need  have  no  fear  of  being  crushed  beneath 
the  fragments  of  that  crasy  and  tottering  chair,  the  pope  is  sitting  in 
•0  uneasily ;  the  very  rumblings  of  the  volcanic  hills  will  die,  and 
their  last  echoes  he  inaudible  on  this  side  of  the  Atiantic,  and  as 
the  Apocalyptic  magician  has  pointed  his  wand,  to  the  dilapidated 
jaws  of  the  Beast,  ue  conclusion  is  plain,  that,  m  he  km  kti  mU  ki$ 
Ueik,  he  eanU  bite!  we  need  not  be  afraid  of  him. 

We  are  told  the  pope  suffers  himself  to  be  adored,  and  calls  hinn 
■elf  God.  So  far  from  this,  we  have  seen  how  he  humbles  himself  be* 
fore  the  altar,  how  he  nravt  the  humblest  of  the  saints  to  pray  for  hint 
lo  God,  and  how  he  has  nad  a  prayer  inscribed  in  our  church  liturgy, 
whraeby  we  ask  of  God  to  preserve  him  from  all  evil,  especially  from 
Hm  worst  of  all  evils,  sin.  Does  this  look  like  exalting  himself  above 
«f«iT  thing  that  is  ealled  God  t  The  present  pope  is  said  to  be  onn 
of  tiie  best  of  men.  The  only  faults  alleged  against  him  are  tiiat  he  gives 
•mplovment  to  a  large  number  of  poor  tradesmen,  rebuilding  the 
hnniea  church  of  St.  Paul — and  that  lie  /aibt«m{f^  somewhat  profuse- 
ly.   I  wish  every  one  here  had  as  little  to  answer  for. 

Much  has  been  said  about  the  gold  and  silver  of  the  Vatican.  My 
friend,  I  am  sure,  knows  that  money  is  a  necessary  evil.  If  we  all  had 
a  little  more  of  it,  we  might  purchase  heaven  with  the  mammon  of  ini- 
qnity ;  hat  the  pope  is  now  poor.    If  I  am  rightiy  informed,  his  uen* 


021 


MIT  I 


isi 


.'**'  ^^  fwimtldy,  or  mlbiliiiiately,  lost  this  mark 
if  It  b«  one.  But  my  worthy  opponeit  has  oTerlooked 
lie  fact  Jadea  ahoiiiMled  in  gold ;  St.  Peter's,  in  Rome, 
_  , .  ,J?r*^  *"  *'^®''  ^^^^  ^^  ^^P'®  of  Jerusalem,  with  plaiu 
^fir^i^ij  .  "  "^""^  hesieged  Jemsalem,  the  Jews  swallowed  their 
fiiid  to  hide  it  from  Iheir  rapacious  conquerors— and  this  was  made  a 
•ew  InoHleBt  m  the  dreadful  vengeance  of  heaven  upon  that  deicidal 
Ijcople,  for  the  soldiers,  in  quest  of  gold,  ripped  open  the  bodies  of 
tte  iU-iited  victims  whom  famine,  or  the  arrow,  had  precipitated  from 
Miaaparts.  After  the  sacking  of  Jerusalem,  so  great  was  thequan- 
■If  tr gold  ohlained  in  it,  that  gold  fell,  in  sterling  value,  throughou 
ttt  lliMl  «ii|iim.  This  would  prove,  that  Jerusalem  was  the  beast. 
Mow  vain  are  all  the  gentleman's  eloquent  remarks.  Not  one  of  these 
iiarfes  »  Miliar  to  Rome,  while  many  of  them  are  not  applicable  to 
Jtetal III.  I  will  say  nothing  about  the  millstone;  it  went  to  the 
Mm,  aiid  so  did  the  fcnaeman's  argument. 

Myfrieiids,  I  iiav<a  oneor  two  arguments  to  borrow  from  a  vervdis- 
tiiipiih^  Catholic  writer.  Dr.  Lingard,  author  of  the  history  of  Enff- 

i!!fL  1^  •^■"  !2L!i^  my  Send  has  any  of  the  symptoma  of 
KiaBta  hMPi  an  pttilkieallj  deacfibed. 

•i-"*?*!*?  ^}^hp^  of  mom  than  fifteen  centurie*.  the  vision*  of  the  .pot- 
tfc^^  Joim  had  been  enreloped  in  the  thickest  obicarjtv.    At  the  em  of  tblro- 

lMeTr««Z:i  IkK  ^  SJ"®<»  •«/y  oW  womea,  of  eitber  gender.  biTCeei 
2!  ^!?!!  ;*T  *t  T  ?»  "^^  ^^  mv^tery,  end  to  ret  eel  to  the  world  ths 
Hue  meuung  of  the  book  of  Reveletiou*.  From  the  deji  of  Luther  to  the  ptee. 
Ci..!!lTf  P*^?'^^  •  nomerouf  end  uninterrupted  tucceMion  of  trantlalon, 
lMt«rwt.espo«ttor%  end  annotntort,  who  may  truly  be  mid  to  hare  seen  v\Z 
!!!!!*•  J  w  ^  **•'*  .**'*^*!  dreamt;  and.leM  by  tome  miihap  the  pious  race 
■hony  beco...e  eEtioct,  Bidiop  Warburtoo  ha.  kJl  a  fund  for  the  mipLrt  orX 

IIIiTz!?"  *"•  F«*>^y  did  not  iee  that  he  was  thui  endenvorinr  to  diiiiM 
!RffiI!?*  I  f  u*/™'?S  •P**^'**  .?f  »nte»ectual  dJiease,  which,  far  the  aakf 
jliTsEi''  'i!^  ^ *"*•  ^  ****/»»•  •pocnlyptk  mania.  It  hi  not.  indeS. 
bMa  hitherto  ciniand  m  any  wstom  of  nowSp' ■  Wt  it  i.  not  on  that  accoont 
IJijrenl.  or  lest  raeml;  and,  I  trust.  I  thairconfer  a  benefit  on  the  pnblk  bf 
SEric^  Slidyr       *"**        *'*^  "^  ^  ***""**•  ^  iyiiiptomt  o/thi.  thZ 

-SUrJ Jf!  rT?'™?"*  ?*!*"  ?''  **\*.  '«fo"»«*«o""  broke  from  the  com. 
!?*!rL2-  iT*T**^  church,  they  found  it  convenient  to  justify  their  schism. 
y  |iiea«lin|r  tiiat  the   Pope  was  Antichriit,  and  Rome  tiM  anrlet  tt         of 

SSjwmTl^Z^li''^^  conscious  superiority  of  birth,  they  .night  in  the 

g?Ay^.  fiwulmrrty  with  the  myttenout  volume,  quickl/  produced  th« 
emmMn,  iMiea  n  tne  sabject  of  the  pre^nt  observations.  lU  progress  was 
3rvML'TJ^*fir*'y  department  in  hie:  but  it.  mo.t*diSnguish 

mSSifJilJiSHZ^l  rP*?[l  ^*  ■»»>«  fir.t  manileet.  itaelf  by  n  leelle^ 
■ropa^kiwojlyplik.!  theantichrJ.!.  and  the  man  of  sin;  the  heart  with  ten 

?S!  tr  r^*    luT''**^^^^?."?'*"™"'^  *^«»«  ^  fcvorit?.  die  only  .nb 
CSl^il^^rlu   *"'J  ??'?'**^  pereepUone  amuse  the  UnarinntiJi :  thn 

iSTS^riFaf^'fA^A^  1"*^'**  l*»H  ^'^^  "»*>•*  powerfiil  nund.  sink  into 
*-  imbcalfty  of  childhood.    Of  the  troth  of  this  descnption  we  have  a  melaa 


ii 


.  .  ,  •»  kl.  wil,  an  anaaal 

ke  fb|ie  to  lie  ^wtfpkfift,  Ac  4ke. 


Is  pfeaeked  hi  Lineiki^a  Inn  Oka.pel«  to  fwnvt 


ri 


m 


mmUM  €ATBOUC  SXLIOION. 

daily  BKiof  IB  the  gmaSir  IMSC  Newton.  To  him  Nntera  amMMd  to  have  m- 
loCMd  her  choiccet  aecreta:  a.  n  philoMpher  he  wa.  and  is  ttili  unnralled:  bal 
BO  sooner  did  be  direct  hi.  teIeMX>pe  from  the  motions  of  the  heavenly  bodiet 
to  the  vi«on.  in  the  apocalypse,  than  his  head  grew  dizzy,  the  downfall  of  pope> 
IT  danced  before  hi.  eyes,  and  he  hazarded  predictions  which  on  the  scale  of 
pophetai  have  placed  him  far  beneath  the  well  known  Franci.  Moore,  physician 
nna  almanic^inaker. 

It  .hould  be  obMrved,  that  this  intellectual  malady,  like  the  other  species  of 
nmnia,  assumes  a  thousand  difierent  shapes,  according  to  the  predisposition,  of 
the  Mibject  which  it  attacks.  I  sliall  produce  a  few  inrtance..  In  1789.  Mr. 
Cook  published  a  translation  of  the  apocalypse,  with  key.  to  open  it.  meani^ 
to  hi.  readers  This  reverend  gentleman  wa.  Greek  profemor  in  the  oniversi- 
tj  at  Cambridge;  and,  a.  hi.  reading  naturally  led  him  to  the  Greek  poet.,  fan 
wa.  detennin^  that  the  author  of  the  apocalypse  should  be  a  poet,  and,  more- 
over, the  rival  of  Sophocles.  In  his  opinion,  the  apocalypee  i.  a  tragedy  form- 
•d  on  the  same  plan  as  the  (Edipus  Tyrannus.  ••The  dram*  opens  with  the 
temple  scene;  the  seels,  the  trumpet,  and  the  viab  unfold  the  plot;  and  though 
the  antichrist  does  not  die,  no  more  than  CEklipus,  yet  he  falb  into  such  calami- 
ty a.  make,  him  an  obiect  of  pity,  and  justifies  the  lamentation,  pronounced  on 
hi.  downfall."  Nor  i»  this  all.  By  t^ing  one  of  hi.  apocalvplic  keys  on  the 
Odyieey  of  Homer,  he  ha.  diKovered  that  poem  ako  to  have  been  in.ptred,  and 
inform,  u.  that  the  suitor,  of  Penelope  represent  the  vassnls  of  poperv,  who,  «»• 
der  thn  pretence  of  courting  the  bride,  the  christian  church,  devour  stll  the  good 
things  in  her  honse,  till  Christ,  the  true  Ulysses,  the  •'•<  '••#  or  safe  way,  ar- 
rives, and  wreaks  his  vengeance  on  them.  ^  -  .     « 

la  Mr.  Granville  Sharp,  the  &vortte  apocalyptic  Nostradamus  of  the  Rector 
•f  Newnton  Loogville,  (Le  MeM  reply,  p.  193,  202,)  the  mania  has  shewn  itself 
in  a  different  manner.  This  gentleman  is  known  to  be  singularly  partial  to  nso- 
nosyllables.  He  has  written  a  volume  on  the  Hebrew  letter  van,  and  anothar  on 
the  Greek  articles,  •,  ii,  t«.  From  letter,  and  articles,  he  wa.  induced,  by  his 
previous  success  and  the  importuni^  of  his  friends  to  proceed  to  the  explica- 
tion of  the  visions  in  the  book  of  Revelations.  Here  the  apocalyptic  mania  soon 
discovered  itself:  but  the  appearance  of  the  disease  was  modified  by  hi.  pro- 
viott.  habit,  of  monosyllabic  invcstiention.  He  convinced  hiuMelf  that  the  aamn 
•f  the  beaH  wa.  Latetnos,  and  that  Lateino.  must  signify  the  Latin  charch.  Thn 

Knf  is  curious.  Lateinos,  he  contends,  is  derivea  from  the  Hebrew  monosyl- 
e  LAT,  which  mean,  to  cover  or  conceal.  Now  the  Latin  church,  in  the 
celebration  of  the  mam,  conceal,  wine  of  the  prayers  from  the  people,  by  order- 
ing them  to  be  pronounced  with  a  low  voice:  therefore  the  Latin  church  m  La- 
teinos, the  beast  in  the  apocalypse.  Moreover  the  head  of  the  Latin  church  n sides 
in  the  palace  of  the  Lateran.'a  name  derived  from  the  mme  monosyllable. LAT: 
and  the  Lateran  palace  is  .itnaled  in  the  country  anciently  called  Latinm,  an  ap- 
pellation alw  denved  from  the  mme  monosyllable  Lat:  and  Latinm  i.  a  province 
of  that  part  of  Europe  called  Italy,  which  also  derive,  ito  name  from  the  same 
monosylbble  LAT.  Be  not  startled,  gentle  reader:  apocalyptic  maniacs  cao 
with  eqval  lacility  read  backwards  or  forwards;  and  Mr.  Sharp  informs  ns,  that, 
if  we  read  Italy  backwards,  we  shall  have  Ylati,  in  the  midst  ot  which  is  the  He- 
brew monosyllable  LAT.    Naviget  Anticyram! 

Wera  I  to  describe  all  the  varieties  of  the  disease,  these  obserraiKma  wo«hl 
•wall  to  an  unmeasurable  bulk.  I  shall  therefore  content  myself  with  noticing 
the  prophetic,  which  is  perhaps  the  most  prevalent,  species.  When  the  nund  m 
•eised  with  thiemnnia,  the  regions  of  fotority  are  instantly  opened  to  it.  sight:  it 
can  point  ont  the  date  and  nature  of  every  event  which  i.  to  happen;  it  can  in- 
form «B  in  what  year  popery,  Mohammed  ism,  and  infidelity  nre  to  perish;  when 
imd  where  antichrist  is  to  be  born,  reign,  and  die:  who  b  to  restora  the  Holy 
Land  to  toe  Jews;  and  in  what  year  the  new  Jerusalem  is  to  descend  from  henvoi. 
It  is  in  vain  that  preceding  prophets  have  frnonently  outlived  their  own  predic- 
tioas:  tiie  lessons  of  experience  are  heard  with  contempt:  and  each  new  sear  is 
convinced  of  the  truth  of  his  own  visions.  Among  those  who  have  sutfered  Jbte- 
ly  under  this  form  of  the  disease,  the  most  distinguished  are  Mr.  Whitaker  and 
Mr.  Faber.  both  sch<4ars  of  exteauve  erudition,  and  both  equally  animated 
against  the  Church  of  Rome.  They  both  agree  thatLuther  is  the  angel  wi  h  the 
everla.tJng  gospel;  and,  if  by  hi.  go.pel  they  mean  the  K»lifidian  doctrine  <%lrea- 
dy  noticed,  they  have  a  chance  to  be  right  It  may  juatly  be  called  everlasting 
▼  2 


■«*♦ 


INBATI  OH  THB 

i»ritifin|)ff«l>iUyiiid  prowljtttM  loacMBMMAtlldw^cratliet^  Wr. 
Whitaker  ditcoverf  tlist  tlie  two  bom  ©f  th«  biwC  ire  IIm  two  oraMMk  ordora 
of  tlM  Dominicwis  asd  FrancincaM.  Wby  tiicy  tbovld  cham  tbo  profereoco  be- 
Ibffo  thoar  lmtlirt%  of  fraatcr  «itk|iiit]r.  or  mora  general  dilfailoK  I  koow  not; 
iMt  it  iicerteinlj  aofortiuMte  tltat  tliolMMl  Im  not  four  homfl  tb«iiTO«,iro 
■on  of  Benedict  and  Loyola,  might  have  had  the  honor  of  beiof  Matod  oa  nm 
ffuniniiir  two.  The  tame  gentleman  infomit  m  that  the  Ottoman  eamiffe  w0l 
■o«Ib  fill,  EooM  be  wretted  from  the  pop,  and  tba  le^  of  the  pojpMy  be  tr 
ferred  to  "        "  --    -  . 


BOMAK  CATHOUO   BBJOIOlf . 


247 


em.  Mr.  Faber  makea  an  equal  display  of  erudition;  bat  thn 
thM  anfei,  Mr.  Wbitaker*s  Zuingle,  he  hai  ptoced  in  a  noat  uncomfortable  aitmi* 
itlNS  bound  him  foft  in  the  midit  of  the  ocean,  and  transformed  him  into 
^.  MMmr^mrek^Emgkmd!  Nor  does  he  alwavs  arree  with  his  riral  in  mom 
important  points.  The  two  beasts  he  shews  to  be  tile  two  contemporary  Ito- 
man  empires,  temporal  and  spiritual,  under  the  emperora  and  the  pooes:  and 
gives  hb  raaders  the  pleasing  intelligence,  that  both  tae  Tnrk  and  the  n>pe  will 
empire  in  the  year  1868.  Though  be  does  not  eipect  to  witness  this  happy  event 
'  be  has  the  goodness  to  promise  a  sight  of  it  to  many  of  the  preaent 

ly  for  these  two  prophets,  each  dit poted  the  accuracy  of  the  piw- 

foitowed;  and  the  raault  has  been 


III 


•  conviction  in  the  minds  of  moat  of  their  readers,  that  each  has  completely  pso- 
ceedpd  in  deiuolishing  the  ajslaoi  of  hfs  adversary,  and  compleieiy  foiled  in  eatab- 

l^.'r.^^TWi^  <o  d^crib.  .h.  dift....  .r»P*o».rd.b  di^;  b^ 

I  bop  1  shnU  be  excused  from  indicating  the  method  of  cura.    When  the  mania 
'  obCaine  1  possession  of  the  brain,  1  doubt  whether  three  Anticjr roe  would 

'  'ft  Okpol  it    I  would  rather,  like  Dr.  Trotter  in  his  treatise  on  the 

lenment,  endeavor  to  correct  that  mndufmUmm  which  nato- 
■a%  liads  to'  it  I  would  advise  the  PhMealant  theologian  to  sospend,  for  a  while 
■I  ienal,  bis  assent  to  some  of  those  doctrines,  which  edaution  has  Uught  him 
to  revera  as  snered.  I  would  have  him  team  to  doubt  whether  it  be  certain,  that 
nic 


m  long  sucenasion  of  bishops,  throngh  many  centuries,  can  be  that  one  individual 
'iiicfflied  by  St  Flaul  as  the  man  of  sini  or  that  the  church,  from  which  ahnoet 
nil  other  ebureiiea  have  received  the  knowledge  of  the  gospel  is,  **the  giuot 
mother  of  harloli,**  aud  the  kingdom  of  Antichrist.  I  would  recommend  tolim. 
If  bo  mail  iodiilMr  the  apocalyptic  hierocly  phics,  to  attend  to  the  solemn  assev« 
•ration  of  their  aathor,  which  la  frequently  repeated  both  in  the  first  and  the  last 
chapters,  thai  bis  predictioos  were,  even  at  the  time  in  which  he  wrote,  on  the 
point  of  beiog  Inifilled.    In  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  first  period  of 

to  exercise  his  ingenuity, and  may  pop- 

I  am  nwara  that  what  I  aak,  will  not  londily 


point  01  beiw  inifilled.    In  the  destruction 

haps  stumble  on  tic  'Oolycnio  which  can  le 


contained  in  this 

bo  nanled  to 


in  Rome 


The  doctrine  that  popery  is  the  beast,  the  pop  antichrist, 
the  whora  of  BalMrfon,  ii,  I  know,  an  important  part  of  tho 


portent  part 

the  words  of  a 
I  con- 
on  the 


■Mr  fotpoi  peached  by  Lnther  and  his  associatei:  it  forma,  to  nse  thewoi 
ianmed  prelate,*  •*  a  primary  pillar  of  the  reformed  foith.**  ^  But  when 
sider  tho  dangerous  consequences  of  this  doctrine,  its  deleterious  effects 

It  of  sooae  among  the  most  distinrnished  writera  of  the  Protestnnt  cooi- 

tho  rUkttle  whieb  it  serves  to  throw  oo  the  inspired  writings,  and  Iho 

PMon  If  givoi  10'  inO'  sncen  'ana  comemp  oi  we  prosesaao  nwaei,  i  lo* 


i  wolMooMiod  hop  that,  for  the  nke  of  religion  'and  hnmnnity,  it  will 

with  Mb  HipMfft  imn  the  enlightened  characters,  who  now  poside  in 
f§m  astabliabed^'Ohnnb.  If  it  once  foraaed  a  pillar  of  the  reforoMtioo^t  ooacaito 
It  eooKi  only  do  n  lamporary  support,  woMm  nmy  now  oo  'lonMvoa'  wimooi  qmi* 
gor  to  the  4bric.  To  the  pious  fraud,  from  its  utility,  tba  firat  rafonnen  ndgit 
''  reconcile  their  conseienoes;  at  the  present  day  it  may  be  rejected  by  tbair 
with  some  credit:  it  cannot  be  retained  without  disgrace. 

*  Watson's  Thsalsf  isal  IVaets,  veL  v.  p.  7. 


!»*-« 


Mll.CAMFBiXLriaao-  .  r     r -i.. 

The  blBhop  has  not  giren  one  but  many  and  yanous  proofe  of  ti^« 
troth  of  an  adage  of  some  currency  and  authonty.    Napoleon  in  hu 
flight  from  Mc^cow,  muting  on  recent  disasters,  oOen  ottered  this  ex- 
pression :  "  There  is  but  one  short  step  ftom  the  sublime  to  the  ridicu. 
fous/'    I  never  before  witnessed  so  illustrious  a  proof  of  the  inTin- 
ciblc  force  of  the  argument  from  prophecy.    I  looked  at  the  gentle- 
man writhing  under  the  accumulating  evidence,  amounting  almost  to 
demonstration,  that  I  had  asserted  no  defaniation  in  my  fourth  propo- 
sition.   Instead  of  meeUng  the  subject  with  scripture  and  argument, 
like  the  scuttle  fish,  he  darkens  the  waters  that  he  ««yj!^Pf^™ 
eye  and  the  hand  of  his  pursuer.     His  effort  at  mystification  is  a* 
ridiculous  as  it  is  imbecile.    He  invokes  the  assistance  of  some  old 
lady  to  create  a  laugh ;  hut  the  audience  has  got  tired  laughing  at  his 
maLuvres.    The  subject  is  two  grave,  and  tie  \"dience  too  deeply 
penetrated  with  the  awful  truth  which  they  had  just  heard  to  be  amus- 
Sd  by  such  levity.     Failing  so  manifestly,  m  the  attempt  to  disparage 
mil  use  of  the  prophecies,  he  undertakes  to  explain.     He  is  dnven 
into  Asia  to  the  Koran,  and  to  Mecca  for  the  man  of  sm !     How  have 
the  weapons  of  war  perished !    Facts  are  not  found  in  the  history  of 
Mahomet  or  Mahometanism,  to  explain  these  prophecies :  and  conscious 
of  this,  his  own  courage  fails,  and  a  second  time  he  resorts  to  ndicule. 
As  Voltaire,  Volney,  and  other  wits,  have  fruitlessly  attempted  to 
laugh  Christianity  out  of  countenance,  he  endeavors  to  place  the  whole 
matter  before  you  as  idle  and  absurd.    Could  my  rhetorical  and  ingen- 
ious opponent  afford  more  unequivocal  manifestations  of  confusion  and 
dismay;  than  you  have  now  witnessed  1     But,  my  ^"ends,  we  are  not 
to  be  laughed  out  of  our  argument,  that  stands  before  us  like  we  rocfc 
of  Oibraftar.    The  waves  that  strike  it,  but  foam  out  Aeir  imbecility, 
and  are  broken  to  pieces.     He  may,  indeed,  torture  his  ingenuity  to 
escape  from  an  argument,  which  he  dare  not,  which  he  cannot  meet , 
but  he  will  torture  it  in  vain. 

The  effort  of  my  opponent  has  been  as  much  to  disparage  prophecy 
itself,  as  any  mode  of  interpreting  it.  According  to  hun,  prophecy 
Is  no  gift :  On  our  principles,  it  is  at  least  as  useful  and  interesUng 
as  history.  It  is  one  of  the  kindest  boons  of  heaven,  that  we  are  per- 
mitted sometimes  to  peep  into  the  future,  guided  by  the  lamp  of  etef- 
nity.  The  whole  Bible,  is  for  the  most  part,  history  and  propb^* 
It  is  almost  all  history,  for  prophecy  is  the  history  of  the  futiye.  God 
never  held  the  human  family  in  suspense  respecUng  their  vital  inter- 
ests. Their  origin,  duty,  and  destiny,  he  has  equally  regarded  in  aU 
his  communicauons.  Soon  ••  our  firat  parents  had  transgressedui 
Eden,  he  permitted  not  one  sun  to  go  down,  till  he  appeared  to  tiMi 
and  revealed  a  portion  of  his  purposes.  In  a  single  period  he  o«j- 
denses  a  miniature  view  of  the  future  destinies  of  mankind :  "  I  wUl 
place  enmity,"  aaid  he  to  the  serpent,  **  between  thy  seed  and^hcr 
ieed :  it  shall  broise  thy  head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel.  l 
thank  our  Heavenly  Father,  that  he  has  thus  from  the  beginning  vouoH- 
eafed  to  his  children  something  of  the  future.  Indeed,  so  abundant 
are  his  revelations,  his  promises  which  are  all  prophecies,  and  hit 
prophecies  which  all  threaten  or  promise,  that  there  is  scarce  a  single 
page  of  the  whole  Bible  without  a  prophecy  inscribed  upon  it.    l^er^ 


918' 


DEBATE   0'?l   THE 


EOHAE  OATHOUO   EELI6I0N. 


249 


1 


*. 


ttinlj  ihy  oppononl  hat  forgntSen  this !  Hm  he  not^  according  to  hif 
ability,  hmm  tnrnliiff  into  ridicule  prophecy  itself,  the  Bible  itself 
God*!  food  and  perfect  mfll  But  if  prophecy  be  wholly  imtiiteni- 
gible ;  Why,  I  ask,  sheild  it  constitute  so  large  a  portion  of  God*i 
flniy  'hmk  to  man  I  But  I  will  not  farther  debate  this  question.  The 
feaieiiin  himself  would  admit  all  tliis,  on  any  other  occasion. 

I  did  not  intend,  indeed,  and  I  am  sorry  I  proposed ,  an  argument  of 
tUb  kind  before  such  an  assembly,  limited  as  I  am  at  present  to  an 
heur  or  two,  at  most  to  complete  it  If  my  opponent  would  devote 
with  met  day  or  two  to  this  subject,  I  might  even  satisfy  himself, 
BUI  onlj  that  prophecy  is  a  gifl,  m  intelligent  gift ;  but  that  much  of 
it  pertains  to  the  ofiein,  progress,  and  catastrophe  of  that  very  biermi^ 
ehy,  of  wliich  he  is  himself  a  member. 

Them  are  two  kinds  of  maps  in  schools ;  one  gives  both  the  place 
■■d  the  name  of  it,  the  other  fsometimes  called  a  blank  map,)  giTes 
§m  place  without  the  name.  The  former  represents  history ;  the  lat- 
ter, prophecy*  Prophecy  is  as  correct  a  map  of  the  future,  as  histo* 
lyia  ef  the  post ;  but  it  is  not  always  quite  so  obvious.  I  have  tauriit 
pofiaphy  with  these  two  sorts  of  maps.  The  pupil  studied  on  that 
inscribed  with  the  names  of  the  places,  and  we  eiamined  him  on  the 
blank  map.  The  study  of  fulfilled  prophecy,  with  the  history  of  the 
past,  prepares  us  for  the  blank  map,  the  outline  of  the  future.  On 
the  Hank  map,  we  can  learn  the  ^fieat  outline  of  things — ^their  rela 
five  poeitiims,  distances  and  magmtudes.  We  may  sometimes  err,  in 
iziiff  the  proper  name  on  every  place:  but  we  cannot  greatly  err,  in 
fonniw  a  useful  acauainitnee  Wlih  the  whole ;  especially,  having  a 
eonect  Knowledge  or  what  is  past,  or  of  certain  portions  of  the  past, 
vhich  must  ever  be  a  key  to  the  future.  Thus  we  can  acquire  a  clear 
aid  satisfactor^r  outline  of  the  vast  expanse  of  future  time,  although 
v«  Eiay,  sometimes,  err  in  a  date,  or  in  the  name  of  a  particular  place, 
'petsun,  or  'thing. 

But  as  my  opponent  has  so  perfectly  failed  to  meet  my  argument; 
I  shall  have  to  give  it  to  the  public  without  much  amplification  or 
pnwl  I  will,  therefore,  recapitulate,  emphatically,  a  few  of  the 
grand  land.  :inarks ;  and 

!•  Ilie  two  tyrannies  mentioned  in  Baniel  and  John,  arose  out  of 
the  peal  sea,  the  Mediterranean  ;  or,  front  among  the  nations  border- 
ing theieon,  in  a  state  of  tumult  Does  not  Rome  stand  on  these  wa- 
ters ;  and  is  not  Italy  almost  surrounded  by  them  !  The  Tiber  itself, 
ineonaldenhle  as  it  is,  is  nenHlieless,  a  part  of  this  very  sea.  This 
heaileiaw  net  firem  the  deserts  of  Arabia;  nor  from  the  Paeifio,  nor 
Ike^ . Aiantie  i  hot  Ipmi.  :the  Mediterranean. 

i»  The  eiigin  or  e—MweMceinepI  of  these  two  despotisms,  or  of  the 
fiiMlle  beasts  of  Daniel  and  John,  eiactly  synohroniie.  They  wero 
aontMEpoiaiiee:   indeed,  they  aro  identical.    They  both  riae  at  the 
:iame  time  and  plaoe. 

3.  They  are  eO'«xistent,  and  eontinae  the  name  time,  1860 /eais. 

i.  The  typea,  in  both  pictures,  or  the  giand  incidents  and  eharae- 
''imfatiea.  'aro  'the  aaine. 

6.  Their  latter  end  is  the  same.  Then  is,  indeed,  no  argument  on 
iUa  ■abject :  it  is  as  plain  as  history.  My  opponent  will  never  debate 
it  Paul  occupies  the  plaoe  of  a  eonmentator  or  interpreutor,  and 
«itkoiil  a  figaro  explains  the  i^ystery  of  iniquity.  He  avers  the  im- 
peesibiity  of  the  appearanee  of  this  monster,  this  papal  hierarohy,  so 


|«w  as  pamn  Rome,  which  then  hindeied  a  pope,  shjwld  continue  to 
SSle"  'aS  commeitaloro  aademtand,  «  he  that  lete,"  as  rofemng  to 
!t^n  Rome.  We  have  already  seen,  that  we  «?««  not  JPf  *  PPJ^ 
CXe  the  time  of  Phocas  the  usurper,  and  B^^i^f^J^^-  ^^^ 
ecclesiastic  communion  of  nations,  under  a  ghostly  monarchy,  ever 
itood  on  earth  before  that  day.  r  .v:- ««— «.«»k 

iSnl  .peaks  of  ihe  temple  of  God,  a.  '^I'^l^f'T,^^'^^. 
.ntagonistpower.  It  was  not  ia  a  pare  church  he  »PPe«?J.  «^'  Jf ; 
tainly  it  was  not  amons  the  pagan  Arabs,  that  this  man  of}^^'"^^"' 
soch  U  the  import  of  siL  in  tfiis  passaee)  showed  his  Ma8I*?""«»  <^^ 

I  Mid  not,  that  there  was  no  chuicl  of  God  at  Rome,  Wore  the  piH 
p«,?  f  Item  never  had  been  a  true  church  of  God,  at  R<"»« !  *«  P-P^ 
Sr  L  man  of ««,  never  could  have  been  bom  th«e.  /"^^''^ 
wrred,  emphatically,  the  man  of  sin  is  not  a  pagan,  a  Turl^  a  pro- 
fessed infidel ;  bot,  an  apostate  Christian.  

Doe.  not  the  pope  of  ftome,  and  none  but  the  pope  of  Rome, «!»  "P 
dllhf grand  liJiaSHsnI.  of  this  painUngI  He  ^\^"^^^f^''^ 
M  that  is  called  a  god-a  magistrate,  a  pagan  ?!'^"y\»'~'«J,°1 
himself:  for  no  felse  God,  nor  the  only  living  "»^.*™f.^°^;  P^'f^ 
to  fonrive  sins  before  they  were  committed !  His  name  is  covered 
with  ^Mphemy.  There  never  stood  on  earth  such  ^J^o'ffiJ^}; 
ing  like  a  lamb,  and  speaking  like  a  dragon.  1  need  no^  however, 
leneat  what  has  not  been  contradicted.  .    ..    '     .  <• 

"^^My  a^ment  is  unanswered.  I  regret  Oiat  it  must  go  to  *e  PuWic^ 
without  being  more  fully  tested.  As  to  Latetnos,  the  g«ntl«nan  m^ 
laugh  at  it;  but  can  he  show  state  or  empire,  whose  name  't^e  that  of 
MeXaiine  Banleia,  will  spell  666  !    If  he  cannot,  this  alone  ought  to 

^^^'mv  oppoSS^t  did"me  groat  honor,  in  giving  me  such  a  ^o"^^®  »» 
Sir  Isaac  Newton,  to  bear  half  the  brunt  of  his  indignation.  Greater 
literary  and  ecclesiastic  names,  than  that  of  this  great  P^l^^^^V^^'l^^^ 
briffhtei  stars  in  universal  knowledge,  adorn  those  prophetic  heavens, 
aniconcentrate  their  light  upon  this  map,  which  I  have  ^^J'^'^l 
and  imperfecUy.  What,  if  f  should  let  the  gentleman  ««•  » J*^,^™ 
first  magnitude,  or  hear  an  archdeacon,  m  his  own  church,  say  a  wort 
on  Babylon,  and  on  the  woman  that  Mts  <>n  many  waters . 

-  WhS  cmn  there  safely  H^e.  where  not  only  wicked  things  are  »»^\' ^  «J 

ZL  wicked Wl  -n^dly  thing.;  «d  to  ^'^^.^^^^•'^^ySi^r!^ 
ble:  where  they  do  not  only  not  rtcetve$wnddoctnm,  but  bitterly^ pemcnij 

•11  tbo«»  who  do  resist  the  madnewi  of  their  wiUs  .'  /  «„k.1^«    h«t  fron 

»  What  is  it,  think  you.  to  be.dnink  with  the  cap  of  Bf  7^9";  ^tt^ 

loor  conTersation  with  hef  to  be  «>  infected  with  the  contagion  of^^^^*J^^ 
Hng  the  erring  herd,yoi.  willingly  embrace  ^-^JJ  ^^^^^fH^^i^^ 
riffht^tif,  mad  things  for  aonml;  and  to  desire  mlher  to  be  "~j2lL2ln.-l 
uSe.  th«i  to  be  wise^lone  with  danger  and  dension  1  He  that  »  d^fcjMt  injM^ 

r» C?  the-,  ought  not  to  li.e  th««,  ^''^^M^^Jt^'.^^^^I^f^J^J^ 
wevailed  m  to  infect  all  men  with  Iti  coatiffoii."    Mch^hm  4€  Clmmg%§, 

^U'^9h^  of  Sifnomaeal  Prelates,  Utmea^^\  ,j_.^ 

«  The  ch^h  i»  now  become  a  shop  of  me«Wi«>.  or  rather  of  ~«>«y  "J 
iMMit**  in  which  all  the  sacraments  are  exposed  to  tale.  •  f»"** 

SESfoii  Ton  see  Inch  mL  admitted  to  tUpriesthood  and  other  holy  ordj«, 
JCtTi/iZ  aX™Jd.  and  «Mm:e  able  to  ^id  though  -aywardly  sjjd  wjA- 
HTnndewtandinK  one  syllable  after  another,  who  know  no  more  Latin,  hai. 
fk^T  dTAnTc.  who,  wien  they  read.  pray,  or  sing,  know  not,  whether  they 
btei  <LT?S.5«-i^  him-^.  ™diSp1i»ed.  anqaiet.  glattom.  drunkanU 

•2 


•    a'.  -I    -- — !''■*•■*•  *»«*  Hfi Milwiij,  uad  in OM  itoid, Idk  ukI  {gnoiMt" 
IB  Ma  look  of  Ae  eomipl  timie  tftk^  ohmli,  «m.  i» 

•^TJrtjjIijifM deilcd  witli  tlM  tiali  ol all  viem; Md  HMgiit  be  itij aiUid tlM 
■mmmjfMthrmmni§i  that,  lbs  i^iiif  of  tli«  prophtt  wm  now  ▼•liiiad,  tliat 
jmm  m  lm§tjfthim  !•  flifrMlcfl,  eveiy  one  wufiven  to  coTetoatncM:  that 
MMii  tlte  finplMt  to  lib  pricrt,  tf  eiy  one  M^  •        •        •       • 

Wlio  praiisliM  or  declu«t  tlMfonwl?  Who  «th«r  by  woid  or  dmd  ihewt  Om 
tmj  to  lilb 'denwir* 

Afftin : 

■*  what  dioald  I  ipealc,  (with  he)  of  tha  leanbi^  of  the  prlMli,  wh«i  it  b  rmbla 
that  waiMwy  of  them  can  raadt  They  know  aot  woidt,  and  ninch  lew  thian: 
in  of  them  thai  fwjralh.  it  n  hnrtntiaii  to  hioMelC  If  any  man  !■  idle  and  Sb- 
inm  labor.  If  he  lofat  fmm,  be  geta  now  a-dayi  into  the  clewy.  and  then 
pnaa^  he  joint  Mntelf  to  the  rest  of  the  prieMi  that  are  volnptnont,  and  1if« 
ne«»dli|  to  JEptennM,  rather  than  acoordin^  to  the  lawi  of  Chrirt,    Cap.  26. 

*  Such  (inith  ha)  ia  the  abundance  of  wicked  men  in  all  pioleMiom,  that  them 
ii  Marcely  one  amonff  a  thontand,  who  aincerely  doth  what  hit  profeaiion  doch 
iminitai  if  thnie  be  any  liaccret  chaste,  aober,  fragal  penon,  in  any  collecc  or 
convanl.  who  doth  not  walk  in  the  broad  way,  he  it  made  a  ridicnlont  &ble  to  tha 
rtHpttid  It  continually  called  intolent,  mad,  and  hypocritical  fellow;  to  that 
many  who  would  hare  been  good,  bad  tbty  lived  with  rood  and  honett  men. 
are  drawn  by  wicked  company  into  their  ricet,  lett  they  thould  tuffer  the  foM. 
mentioned  reproachct  amonc  their  companioni."    Cap.  26. 

H«  tken  eonoliilet  with  an  apostrophe  to  the  Roman  chnreh,  at 
loilowt : 

••What  thinkest  thon  of  thine  own  prophecy,  the  ReTclatioot  of  St.  Johnt 
Deat  thon  not  think  they  do  at  leatt,  in  part,  belong  to  theet  Thou  hast  not 
anrely  to  ^iy  Ipttall  thame  at  to  deny  thai;  look,  tl^lbre,  into  it,  and  reail 

mff^mmm^mmidJlammmimJ'    Deekrai.  Delect.  Viroram  EccL        ^^ 
111  leaiiie  If  kolant  ife  demaogia,  an  archdeacon  of  the  ehnreh  of 
Uiiiiie,  in  the  fifkerath  centnry. 

Nm  onlw  have  the  sins  of  Sodom  and  Egypt  been  multiplied  in  thia 
Babylon  the  mat,  but  aha  had  superadded  to  these  the  blood-fnilii- 
■asa  and  anally  of  Jerttsalea.  Peraeenlion  is  of  the  very  essence 
aai  apiris  of  the  supiemacy,  not  merely  as  the  martyred  millions  of 
Aialeataata,  of  e?eiT  age,  declare ;  bat  accordingr  to  the  doctnne  of  the 
CMMht  aid  the  oaths  of  her  bishops.  Every  Roman  Catholic  bishop 
ii  awom  to  paiaaeote  heretica  and  schismatics :  even  this  very  gentle- 
llBll  Aataiaoni  JsMraeetA/e  and  oppo§e  kerdict  and  9chiMmaik»  to  Ihe  utmoti 
af  ili  jMaer.  Thia  ia  no  mare  allegation.  I  will  hereafter  produce 
m  oath^  wad  if  it  can  be  oiherwiaa  explained,  I  shall  give  him  an  op* 

Elaailf  to  do  it.  Till  then,  I  prooeed  to  allege,  further,  that  laamad 
man  Cathoiica  have  tiemblinf ly  interpreted  these  propheelea,  at 
Mcmfing  to  Roma  papal.  I  have  another  witness  here,  in  oonfirmaf- 
mm.  iiiBirapaaeh,  and  with  his  taatiiiiony  I  ahail  cloae  theaa  remarkab 

■ran  'iii'iMJVUU. 

**  Whenoe  ia  it  that  thia  hnppaMdf  fa  tf<l,  ftaemiM  all  flcth  b«l  eMvoptodite 
wayt,  wa  weva  all  citiaent  and  inhabilnnta  not  of  the  holy  citr  Innit.  that 
Sg'f^„*^y<'^*?^^*<>f****'P«'P'''tIiaiah  it  ftilfilled,  %o7ia  thaSitUni 
fl%  heme  ahnrlot,''  Let  no  nan  thinkthia  prophecy  hat  been  InliUed  almady 


in  the  detraction  of  Babylon,  or  Jervialem.  'NoTStare  thinga  were  present  to 

doih^iii  m  Retelatioot  tell  us,  the  daughter  of  Zioa  u  not  Jemtalem,  but  Rome; 

and  nit  detofliiilion  of  her  makes  it  plain:  For  the  woman  which  thou  tawest 
(Mill  M}  m  mtmtmi  diy  which  hath  domioioa  over  theAiort  of  the  earth. 
thai  la  api^lnnl  diimimon.  She  tiu,  mith  he.  apoa  leven  hills,  which  mrm^trh 
J^^'y'^^.'Py  ***"  ■«»««<*  »•  rtyled  swticolia.    Sha  ia  foUTtaitb 

the  naatea  m  Umpbamy^ehe  it  the  mother  of  vncleannets,  fomicatjon^ 


ha,  'Of 


BOKAH  CAIWOMC   MBUOIOK. 
«d  rfMHn4«ntlo«.,whfch.feinthee«th;  A^ 

these  matters  as  often  as  ne  cnoosca  w  L™«.ciftn«     In  this  mat- 

Jndira,  "  Let  mry  "•»»  ''"•  •"*  ""  '  ^ 

•"■S^^-'k  ^TJ.T^^\coloty  for  speaking  on  a  subject,  which  1 

?Kr   orS'^^'/woald  be  the  »^^^^^^ 
Snain    ItaW    or  Portugal,  under  similar  ciicomstances.     my  mmaa 
hKeo';5:;riuni^  of  .Simple  denial  of  thoBe  i«»a  at  ^e  m«ae^ 
if  they  were  not  paiU  of  hi»  gyatem;  and  be  may  hare  tlie  luu  oie- 

"o7!l.^V^"  tT'ci.nfe.sion,  one  word  «i  to  the  quotations  from 
E^SsSu""^ ""d  Methodists.  Would  *e  genUeman  wwh  y«.  to 
SdOTUnd,  that  aurUular  ""/«"'"^»  •".onimance  of  those  rehgioM 
"mmuniU;..  «.  taught  and  practised  in  h.s  '^-J'*''  f  thereis  lie 
where  is  the  relevancy  of  these  quottuons  1  If  he  <^?*»',**?,'^i" ^! 
""*"',.„,     urnnfoiia.vourfai»A<  to  one  another,    wllljusuiy 

troth  and  o»»^»''     "^f^iXItf^to  W«.  to  each  other,  and  to  pr-jf 

!?y  '*°  Z^  S^ITm  hTXl  th«  MethodUts  and  EpiscopaU. 
/«. ««  «»rfA«r ,  but  wiU  he  Mrm,  ma  „„,„,!  confessions  !  ! 

^hv^r»T»k  'seekttike  J^-^^pali-?  and  MeOrodisU  bjjr. 
«!rtrf^sbiSe(rf  these  unscripwial  and  ««ful  practices t  They 
ESvow  th^TStey  would  say  uTthe  bishop,  confess  your  &»1^«» 
i!^drw3  will  co/fes.  to  you;  but  on  no  other  »onditto«.  W.  m«J 
;:;y"?i;;u;  we  caunot  4i-^ou.    You  m^r  P»y  ^^^^^^^ 

iustiee  mr  opponent  renders  to  Episcopalians  and  Methodism,  m  mm 

lSlK'«2^- with  himself  onje  -j|-t^^^^^^^^^  ^, 

«  The  taint  continues  ihut:  St.  PhU'P  Ji«J""  JSd  .ubruit  t&emseWes  to  a 

they  who  desire  ta  progrest  in  ^^."V^jt^    rhSit  Method  iwn?]  He  who 

'Z.^^ir::':^e  rti  tl'r ^dSl  &^r  any  of  hi  action, 
thus  acts  will  oe  •ecwrc  iru>" &  .,         -uffer  him  to  err.     Wotniag 


"^ 


liMl}    "lit 
btfal,  1m  wIm 


I 


I 

I 


_J  hfmmy  ova  imlgiiMat    [It  Ibig 

ia^»;iJ«ffJ?:1"'*?"^  'T'  ^'*?^ "'  coMiM«i«i«it  hi  doubtfuiriM  wh* 

Ml  la  oli«dieiice  to  his  confeMor  it  axcuted  froin  tin.  altlMMwii  in  tnith.  wbnl 

iLtuoriJl  "ilf  r*  ^»Methadim.?3  Quoting  from  sTEonyiTb*  K 
IIM  Allowing:  If  tfteni  be  i  doubt  wbetber  wbat  one  it  tboat  to  do  it  anW 
the  comcmodment  of  God.  wc  must  obcj  the  commtndttent  of  our  prSue!'^ 

i-TiSLCl       °''  *=«"'««^/')  "  because,  aItho«t;h  wfant  we  do  be  a«i^.t  oJd 
iieir«rtiiclcit,  OR  account  of  th«  virtn*  nf  nK«JT.«^^  u^: T^  _"  :     *^ 


^i,.,,^,  .    -7  •*=f°"?J  «[  t*»e  Tirtue  of  obeiHence.  we  being  lu^ect  to  our 

fMialm  fio  not  tin/*    [Itthii  Epitcopalianitm?]— Id.  ib.  '' 

lent'.  il,?.S«?li!irST!:*""*?  ^*  ■'•"l'  "•treiiuou.lv  iotbt  npoa  the  pea!- 
tent  t  ob^mg  hiai,  aad  if  he  refuses  to  obey,  et  him  be  sharDirrebukeShL 

ld.ik  If.  16.    P'ime  expired.]  «•  «•■«»  as  possioie. — 

Bm^wiw  Pimcsix  ritet-. 

It  WM  not  heaven's  holy  oracles,  hut  maii'a  preramptnoiis  fbedoni 
Wiethe  wofd  of  God.  that  I  ridiculed.  It  iKw  mj ^friend  whTS. 
irSntlk  ^j'^**'l^..T*^.™P*'  "^^  *^*»<"«*  to  infidels  ocoMiioi 
Sl^rr  nS  «;!r?'^  ^  ^^^l^  -pon  H  his  own  preposterous  inter- 
pwtations,  and  makini^  it  say  what  its  diTine  Author  nerer  intended  it 

r  **ZiJ  ^"J*™  ff^t  »n  tl»«  wty  words  of  that  sacred  book,  that 

mmmmi^  ^  mr^^lme  u  of  any  prhoit  iniefpreiatwn  t""  thai  tkem 

MaliZrr  /!f7^i*"  A/.W,"and  ikan^/uU U  ike pi^ 

tSS  ii-    '•  /'"^"^  on  Ihemselyes  swift  destruction/imrf  many  shall 

^L^f'^lT'^^'  ^h'O"? h  whom  thu  wmy  of  truth  shall  £e  evil 

2?!!*!I;  1     "**''^  ^'^P'^T  *'"®  ««"P^»'««»  «>«'  learned  friend  gavt 

iTiTv  ru^^^  chmnology,  pniving,  at  least,  one 

Sio  my  sausfwstion,  if  not  to  hu  own,  that  we  may  err  in  a  date, 
l'di!ri;.H  ^"f '  ^*  T^'**?  'l?,  ^*^**^'y  ''•^  *•*>»«  «  his  sym 

l-a«.h  1  rr^  't"*  J  '^^  ''"^  '  T"'  "^  •PP'y  to  »>*'«  ^  fig««  of 
Baaian,     ne  n^  oroken  the  eggs  of  asps,  and  ma?  eat  them :  he  bath 

lir-  W Inf  rl^rlSr^  ^^^^  himijel/with  the  Slmy  te,- 

Zm^i^^  ncweiiess,  iiimnstaney,  and  change  of  religion;  but  in 
2  "!?r*  "  neither  mutability  nor  •«  shadow  of  Ticissitude  •' 
My  friend  has  taken  us  a  liahing  again ;  the  sea  monster  baa  dl*. 

9§m  mm  m»  troablmg  of  the  stream.    Tbera  ia  nt%  mm^^  f^^ 

St!  iLT^i  TfT  y".*"  «»  «»•  "MUief,"  will  >i#flv 
i»^i^Tji'?**^  o»ght    to  be  much  obliged  to'wS^? 

"«•■  oy  denying  and  admitting,  raectine  and  adontinv  nrm  t,rJj 
SiE^t^TlSr^iJ^y-^    He*^'hlois  hft'SndloTd  i^O^'ZS^ 

rSrl'  !5*I*''*^^?!"'  P^^  ^»»«  dlrecUons  on  thi.  decalogT 
•ml  shewed  that  6od,  himself,  could  nol  authoriae  a  wM^^^^ 
mm  laws,  .uch  less  a  confosaw.    Hence  hhZr^^^^Z 


SOHAN   CATMOUC    BMLieiOW. 

.-A^  «  G*!.'*  wm  pwisdly  imrflifiMe.  I  wit*  my  fnmd  woiiii 
f!35r3^r««^^«  hr^aWhT  w^^  find  ia  it  maiims  and  example. 
•^nTJ^^h^Tf  ^m  telio^^        nothing  that  could  BcandaUze  htm. 

rZt'it  ™  aathor-^Md  commanded  by  scripture,  pracused  by 

?„e«r  T^^^o"  Pi»- »»  "^^^^^    ^y  "^  .he  men.  faithfully 
do  thCT  comply  with  the  salutary  ordinance. 

Wdo  no?  ai-wde  youne  people  from  ""^^i '"  °°teu 
^t  tho<e  who  are  called  to  fliat  state,  do  not  marry  faster  What  w 
S^^*tert  rfJlSirt  tirade  of  abusive  eitracta  against  the  Catholic 
STurehf  Mmt  I  h've  to  read  dissertations  to  m,  opponent  on  all  the 

me  the  necessity  of  such  frequent  exposure  »f  ^is  — -  1  won  t^^  «^ 
Here  are  the  complete  works  of  Liguori,  in  ^'gjl*  J°J,""5f  ^^Ir".^ 
index  consisUnc  of  one  Tolume.  I  have  performed  a  work  of  sopere- 
l^tion  I  hale  eramined  these  volumes,  from  cover  to  cover,  and 
^^'^^  f  .1  !.„  ZTmnrh  as  a  shadow  be  found  for  the  infamous 
IS.."™  °I  «L™te"T  Wenffromihe  sin  of  wilful  misrepresenta- 
&wil  »v  he  1^  iLn  d^eived,  misled  by-^ti-**!;' Vtf  hf.^' 
%Z  caTde^We  the  elec^    ./  po^k,  that  is  to  '>^f^fJ^^^  ^^^; 

St- r -C  ^^^S^^  "STf^eft  H?.K^;S 
Sidi^  which  is  here  now,  will  be  here  *«  fTLlkL  slaSierl^ 

*"Cro?tCtte?vT„''.S^u^n  of  ^Mh^c  doctrines  and.  practices^ 
thin  Srir  ri^pirand  fcithful  announcemenL  It  is  the  '^'Y^?' 
SSnlf  ouTt^neU  that  did  us  injury  for  Um^.and  M'fJ*  "^  hatf  » 
"  -■  u„,  „„„  the  liffbt  from  heaven  is  breaking.  "Thou  bast  ap- 
SS^  d«S»»,  aniit  is  night,  .■»  it  diall  all  the  beasts  of  the  ««r.h 
f^;I;Sin  riJeti-ald  'they  shall  Ue  down  in  theudena." 

mflU^^pponent  »iy.  the  Tiber  runs  into  the  MedUerreW 
That  is"  fact,  aid  so  do  thi  watere  of  a  thouMind  "'••er  streams.  Ho 
««  *«■  I^  not  prove  that  there  wa.  a  head  of  the  church  in  Borne 
Sore  Con.tan.ine-'i  rime.  This  I  mav  simply  den, ;  <»»«  h"«  '  "^ 
qnoled  the  testimony  of  general  councils,  of  the  fathers,  of  numbe  lesa 

w 


J 


mmmmm^  to  prov«  tlial, 
,  tnd  add  one  foniark  tlMl 


MV  inoootettibki  faoll    I  w§m  to  EiMebiii% ,.^ 

Eotebios  was  Inmtii  in  170.    His  liiitory  eitoiids  to  the  jear  334,  tho 

Opoeli  when  ConatantiiMi  'waa  aole  master  of  the  Roman  empire,  fia- 
■•iiiiis  marrited  tlie  belief  of  the  whole  churob  daring  the  prfwsediog 
itmhrnind  years,  for  no  longer  period  had  elapsed  siiioe  the  death  of 
8iLioliii..WMl  Polyearpt  Ifnauui,  Irencus,  Cains,  a  Roman  pritat* 
and  Ii«gaai|ipiia,  the  eeclesiasUcal  historisD,  U¥ed  in  that  interval, 
mm  Kaaabiiis*  My  friend  has  now  allowed  that,  for  a  long  time,  tho 
ckanli  of  Rome  was  pure.  This  is  true;  but  when  will  he  fulfil  his 
fMutso  at  the  opening  of  the  debate  and  inform  us,  at  last,  from  what 
•inreh  she  is  an  apostacy  1  We  are  coming  near  the  end  of  the  dis- 
•aatM  and  this  is  too  important  a  point  to  heforgoUen, 

••TlisalWiih  formerly  used  the  vernacular  language.'*  So  she  did. 
And  theie  wit  a  weij  good  reason  for  it.  The  Latin  then  waa  the  ver^ 
■mhr  of  the  greatest  part  of  the  civilised  world,  in  consequence  of 
tio  Roman  cooguests.    It  was  generally  known,  where  other  Ian- 

0|W  floaiiiiMi  to  be  the  vernacular.  Su  Paul  wrote  to  the  Romans 
^wek,  •  kngiage  which  all  the  Romans  did  not  nnderstand.  My 
■mm  Mr.  Campbell  has  stated  the  venr  best  reasons,  in  the  preface  to 
■M^MW  Tbetament,  for  the  adoption  of  a  uniform  laffguage  as  the  ve- 

S^  !L2t***i?"'    T**®  *^™®**  Southey  agrees,  if  not  with  him,  at 

Mall  wilh  toe  Catholic  churoh  on  the  subject  of  its  peculiar  fitoess  lo 
la  Ilia  laiigmia  of  the  Christian  Liturgy.  ^^ 

-  iatio,**  nyt  Southey,  Vol.  L  p.  59, "  wm  iiMde  the  lansiragB  of  relifioa;  there 
aacroMn  the  mam  remmm  for  thit  in  Jisk,  ftiid  Speio,  and  Fimnce.  u  lor  ftflrng 
!SJ??if*!?^£f**  of  the  tm;  and  in  Cng^land  also,  there  waa  reason,  whirb, 
inon  Olfcrent,  was  not  less  valid.  A  comnioo  language  was  neceisarv  for 
l&e  cleigy,  who  conmlcred  thrnMcivet  at  belonrinr.  less  to  the  countrr. 
!lL*^'*'^****y  happened,  mdividuallj  to  have  been  Wn.  or  stationed,  than  to 
Msir  oroer.  or  to  cbnatendoni,  for  in  theae  aeea  chriftendoni  svat  legaidadai 
•onMtninr  more  than  a  mere  name.  No  modern  ' 
•a,  orredi 


r  No  modern  laoj^uai^   was  aa  yet  lia« 

f  -.:  •  "Si^S."^**'  regarded  aa  •  written  tongue;  of  neceasltv,  therefore, 
Iflij,  in  whuai  thn  wmtern  cletfy  rend  the  acnptnrea,  and  in  which  the  fothera 
2  «•••■••»  church  bad  composed  their  works,  and  the  councils  had  issued 

ZZLfTS?'  ^T^*7  T^*'*  "!!!?•'*  ■•  **»•  "^^  •^  profcmionni  ka* 
mm  of  the  miawlers  of  religion.    They  preached  and  catechised,  and  confer. 

MlalteMiuon  speech  of  the  country,  and  that  the  church  service  was  not  ver^ 

naif  ininllif  iMe  to  thecongragation  was,  apoa  their  priociplea,  no  ini^onvmiieocn. 

Bntii;  10  this  fmpcct.  there  was  no  real  dindvaotage  in  the  uae  of  a  forein 

loagve;  IB  other  respects  many  and  most  important  advantages  arose  from  ft 

The  clergy  became  of  neceisitj  a  learned  body;  and  to  their  humble  and  m- 

lJ?li?!!LrTl^iT'****t/'^/7  f  ^  '^^  agea.  and  the  preservatU 
jff^TJT^fe  «<■  •■fiqiiity,  whfch.  for  thn  iaitnMStloo7f  all  after  ageV,  have  been 
preserved :  The  itndenia  at  CnalnrtMiy  in  Bede's  time,  were  as  well  skilled,  both 

Sim  i!!li£rfr^  ■■  '".I??"-?!*?*  ■i^^'li  •«*  *5?K»  »»i««»«elf  (worthy  to  be 
25JJf  twereble,  if  ever  that  epithet  was  worthily  appli«l)  had  acquired  all  that 

mfff  pMttbly  telaaread  im  books,  and,  waa  master  of  what  was  then,  the 

I  orele  olhaaMB  fcoowfodga.**  ' 

^   laa.  iaaaaailT  tba  Iilaf„ ,., 

the  saeriimtiii 

pteit  biiiaalf,  does,  to  what  they  answer,  •  Amen.'  When  a  foreigner 
IMB  aaroT  thaaoiintries  where  Greek  is  not  the  vernacular  comes  in- 
iaofflrehunsljea,  and  I  need  aearaely  aieept  even  the  Catholics,  of  the 
emfc  rite,  he  is  pefiMtl|  at  home,  among  his  brethren  in  ftith  and 
jwiwhlp.  Their  eeiaiMNiiea  and  prayers  am  the  same  aa  in  hie  mtiva 
■Mi— llorinans,  French,  Kngiish,  Irish,  Poles,  Swiss,  I'sliana,  Bw 


Tha  paopl^  hava  the  Bobatanea^  Insiiamiily  the  lilaial  translatioa,  ia 
??!l?yy,l>aafca,  of  what  ihe  Ptieai  nwfs,  daring  the  saeriiee,  in 
^HS^r    !5*?"*^  ^  Catholic  Europe.    Tbay  know  aa  well  aa  the 


■OMAll  DATHOUC    mXUGION. 

hSr  oar  priests,  aa  they  di^  Hm  aposdaa,  apaaidag  ^J^f^^^ 
STwTll  Say  cill  oar  own,  "the^^^f  1^^ 
monsof  our  chnreh  are  not  preached  in  Latin,  but  m  as  plam  English 
as  ire  ean  find  in  common  nse.  ..,^„^,   v  l.-. 

1  have  answered  all  I  could  note  of  the  gent  eman's  w«»™-/J«^ 
only  two  of  my  own  to  add  at  present.    It  is  m  "^'•"f  J^ .^/J^: 
lion  of  my  Itirned  opponent  that  monstere  are  always  ««W«";tt«^ 
ofbad  men  or  tyrente.    Now  what  will  my  friend  say  of  Eaekiel  1st 
1    -And  I  s7w-^nd  behold  a  whirlwind  cwne  out  of  the  north  : 
and  a  great  cloud,  and  a  fire  infolding  it,  «jd  »inghtness  was  about  it 
and  out  of  the  midst  thereof,  that  is,  out  of  the  midst  of  the  fire,  as  it 
were  Sie  resemblance  of  Amber',  and  in  the  midst  thereof  the  likentjis 
of  four  living  creatures  :  and  this  was  their  appearance :  there  was  the 
likeness  of  I  man  in  them.    Every  one  had  four  feces,  and  every  one 
four  wings.    Their  feet  were  strelght  feet,  and  «5f  ?*;•*»(.  ^**'^ 
was  like  the  sole  of  a  calfs  foot ;  and  they  soarkled  like  the  appw*- 
ance  of  glowing  brass.   And  they  had  the  hanis  of  a  man,  under  rt^r 
idngs,  on  thei?  four  sides:  and  they  had  faces,  and  wings  on  1*«r 
rdJr  And  I  heard  the  noise  of  their  w inp,  like  the  "oiso  of  ma^y 
waters,  as  it  were  the  voice  of  the  most  high  God;— This  was  tne 
:kirorth"  Ukene»s  of  the  glorv  of  the  Lord,'^  What  -U  my^fnend 
■ow  say  of  his  monster  theory  !    These  animals  are  taken  to  have 
been  figures  of  the  four  Evangelists,— or  of  all  the  Apostles. 

My  iw^ond  remark  ia,  that  whoever  has  read  Hume's  or  I^"»|«^ 
historr  of  England,  knows  that  the  Ana-bantists  when  driven  by  arm- 
Sd  SSiiere  on?  of  the  Parliament  House,  fcund  io  the  famous  Ohver 
Cr«mwelU  a  perfect  facsimile  of  the  Anti-Chn8t.-[Time  expiied.] 

nree  o'elodk,  P.  M 
Mr.  Campbell  rises—  , 

There  waa  one  remark  made  by  my  opponent,  in  his  last  speeek, 
tnd  only  one  that  had  some  appropriate  ^^^^J^^^J  Hi^^t 
symbols.  Upon  this  remark,  1  will  make  one  affirmation.  What»^r 
else  he  has  been  pleased  to  say,  may  pass  for  what  it  is  worth,  tax  finee. 

The  genU^aS  asserts,  that  beasts  of  prey  are  not  alwavs  sym- 
bolical of  tyrants.  Had  I  asserted  that  proposition,  it  would  have 
been  in  point  to  have  made  such  a  remark :  but  unfortunately  for  hun, 
SSat  was  not  my  proposition.  It  was,  that  when  God  depicts  a  tyran- 
Zr\^  «,.^««»n  Ir^X^a  mnneter.  or  Bomo  savaiTO  Wild  bcsst  to  symbohie 


ny,  he  selecU  some  monster,  or  some  savage  wild  beast  to  symbolic 
»J» .      . ,     ,j^j  with— "beasts  of  prey  in  symbolic  language 

.     •««    r\-  J*  11 :*  r.^^.  «nv  nr/%nnftifinn.  that  a  llOU 


S:  But  is  that  identical 


only  represent  tyrante  1"  Or  follows  it  from  my  proposition,  that  a  lion 
or  wi  eagle  must  always  and  uniformly  represent  a  tyrant  1—1  went  fox- 
ther  and  said,  that  some  savage  wild  beast-some  monster  was  God  s 
Inage  of  a  secular  or  ecclesiastic  despotism.  This  was  "fJ  «*pl^^f  ^2;- 

It  ia  true  that  a  "  lion,"  aa  well  as  a  "  lamb"  is  applied  to  the  Sa- 
viOT.  He  is  the  "  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah :"  but  baniel's  Uon  had 
winfia.  and  came  from  the  sea.    It  was  a  monster.  _ 

lie  Roman  spirit,  in  other  words,  the  savage  spint  of  pagan  and 
papal  Rome,  has  been  imparted  even  to  Protestant  states.  In  so  much 
Ui  England  has  for  her  symbol,  or  nauonal  device,  a  tawnv  li^, 
and  her  sons  have  chosen  their  own  eagle,  a  ravenous  bird  o^  ?«!{ 
for  their  device,  that  they  may  pounce  upon  their  mother  s  lion  m^ 
show  themselves  as  full  of  war  and  stratagem  and  spoils,  as  the  baf 


IXnATB  ON   Till 


li*  InMw  nf  i^j  kinf ,  mdm  tbe  device  of  »  mUk  while  dove,  on  m 
mie  iff,  as  nion  eoiisooaiit  to  the  gmdm  ef  the  Reign  of  heavea. 
Z!L  *^'^r*'i  '•  "T^^l'y  barbarous.  Nationa  at  war,  m  at  beat  but 
pMifr  ciTiliied,  and,  therefore,  they  generally  chooae  beasts  of  piey 
for  their  insignia.  Whan  we  become  more  raUonal,  more  cinliied. 
and  more  christian,  we  will  find  some  other  way  of  settUnir  our  na- 
wpal  disputes,  than  with  the  sword,  and  with  the  confusednoise  of 
ih^amor,  and  faiments  baptiied  in  blood. 

Thegentkmyii  asked,  the  other  day,  (and  I  know  not  whether 
mL^!uInJ  f'^^T^'^  impertinent  matters  introduced,  I  paid 
any  attenUoo  to  it)— if  God  coufd  make  twelve  men  infallible,  could 
JT  "*1  ™*T  *?,  °**°y  "?**'®  infallible  as  he  pleased ;  and  continue 
tb«  through  all  succeeding  time!!  Certainl/he  could.  I  answer! 
hit  there  is  no  philosophy  m  this  question.    I  might  retoJt,  could  not 

nuir  Miellitea  as  he  pleased  I    And  the  s.^e  answer  would  equally 

the  system  of  nature,  nor  the  system  of  religiVm  i^l  them.  'Hw 
uiapijed  twelve  made  a  full  revelation  of  christian  truth.  They  taught 
£lTiZl!!T"'  ^®  "r*  "^""Smore.  If  a  full  and  explfcil 
aZtT^  1^"^T?^  ?*?  ^^'^""y  pi«8erved;  ten  thousand 
""^  «Tr  °<'^Pe"'^V**'?.**'"®***°  system,  by  adding  a  new  idea. 
ii-S  kTr  ^""^  "L*  f^^"^^  ^®  <>^«'  ^J'  I  thinl  I  have  ac 
•5ri-  V"  °®il?y  ^^^  ^'^™  ***™«  "e*^  source,  or  repeats,  I  know 
■ntliinsii,  "If  the  testimony  of  tradition  be  not  infallible  how  can 
fjWlywfte  Bible  to  be  inspired  t"  This,  together  with  his  reoeated  ' 

rSfeST  f^r^hfa*"^**"**  ^ro  ^  '"  ?*  ^^  *»"  "^^  «^«  testimony 
ilSSr  tL-^  8^«^>««"/f  Peter,  &c.;  I  reserved  for  my  sixth  prl 
piiition,  which,  because  of  the  advanced  state  of  the  discussion,  as 
iHMeat  tune,  is  likely  to  be  crowded  into  a  corner,  I  theiefora  heir 
IMrmiasioii  to  introduce  it  at  this  Ume.  mewioio  oeg 

fm^mkl  IhU'TJfJ'JT'^^JS^  ^'a  P?*«?r°««  *«  »>•*•«  r »«n  os  the  Bible,  and 

be22l?nTrH^?i*'r^^^^  Jbe  bishop  hag  himself  averred,  "I 

Mmm  In  tlie  Holy  Catholic  church :"  but  this  phrase  needs  a  general 
ooiieil  to  explain  it.  Does  it  mean,  I  believrtt*  Catholic  cfurch^ 
Son  ^anW  Z^""  ^^•f^olk  chumh  1  Do  they  confide  in  it  for  sal va! 

amtiiguous.  The  "  fides  carbonana"  is  thus  expressed :  **Ibelievo 
What  theohuioh  believes;  and  iha  eharoh  believes  what  I  believe* 
tad  we  kiih  believe  the  same  thing.''  Or,  as  rep^tS  the  oX; 
«iy,  the  Konmn  Catholk  believea  the  bible  on  the  authority  of  the 
«iiich,  and  the  church  on  the  authority  of  the  bible !  But  the  Chris- 
STir  ?*?r*l     .   T^  expected  to  be  always  ready  to  give  a  reason 

Z^^^li^''  l*^™'  a^*^  ^  r'**"'  and  every  communica. 
tt»  frwiliiii  IS  rational ;  and  as  man  is  a  reasonable  being,  he  must 
hare  good  nwons  to  offer  for  his  believing  the  christiaS  reliSon. 

Z^lZfmy^Z  ^i^i^*'  ^.  "^^^  ^^  faith,"wh^'?:S; 

ZJTh^l  m^  ^^®'  ^^  •""  ^^  *^«  ^**°»*«  Catholic  was  the 
S!  t'^Sf "t  ^*  f!?!®,'**I?°  "^"^^^^  i««ti<y  any  one  for  being  a 
low.  a  Turk,  or  an  infidel.    He  that  is  of  the  ordi  of  All  or  OiL' 


■OMAW  cAmiiLici  mmwioN. 


Wf 


hat  Ikeii,  la  gooi  t  reason  to  give  for  his  faith  in  the  Koran,  aa  lay 
Romanist  haa  to  givo  lor  his  &th  in  the  bible,  if  his  answer  to  the 
qveatioa,  ^wk^  dommheHamr  'w,  Beemm  imf  Mker^  wlktrntmrnt^ 
or  Ukt  tkurtk  Ml  me  ii  wm  m.  I  woold,  indeed,  be  gratiiod  to  leoM 
from  my  opponent,  Dr.  Pobckll,  why  he  would  not  have  had  as  good 
•oasoB  for  believing  in  the  Koran,  as  he  has  for  being  a  Roman  Ca- 
iholie,  OB  the  ground  of  mere  tradition,  had  he  happened  to  have  beeii 
bom  in  Torkey  !  There  must  be  an  examination  of  the  teatHDony, 
and  perception  of  its  troth,  on  its  own  intrinsic  excellence;  or,  a  eoB- 
vietion  of  its  troth  upon  the  evidence  which  it  afforda  ;  else  tlioio  is  w 
leaaoa  in  faith— it  is  mere  credulity,  or  superetition. 

The  firat,  and  characteristic  difference,  between  the  Protestant  and 
tke  Roman  Catholic,  is  this :  the  former  believes  the  scriptures  firat, 
and  the  church  afterwards ;  whereas,  the  latter  believes  the  chnrsk 
first,  and  the  scriptures  afterwards.  "  But,"  says  the  bishop,  •«whm 
does  the  Protestant  get  the  bible  to  believe,  but  through  the  chuehr* 
And  that  firat  bnnga  oa  to  the  proposition. 

If  any  person  hand  me  a  book,  and  I  read  it,  and  believe  it,  does  ny 
faith  in  it  necessarily  rest  upon  him  who  hands  it  to  me  f  And,  yet, 
this  is  the  gigantic  strength  of  all  that  my  opponent  can  say  on  this 
subject.  It  would  be  much  more  plausible,  that  the  Proteatants  aio 
indebted  exclusively  to  the  Roman  Catholic  chureh  for  the  book,  if 
Protestants  believed  all  the  Roman  Catholic  traditions,  as  well  as  the 
bible :  but,  while  we  reject  the  apocrypha,  and  the  traditions  of  popery, 
and  receive  the  bible  only,  thia  fact  will  answer  a  thousand  volumea  of 
sophistry,  in  proof  that  our  faith  in  the  bible,  reata  not  upon  the  author- 
ity  of  the  chureh  of  Rome.  The  fact,  that  we  reject  her  apoeiyphal 
bible  and  testament,  with  all  other  traditions  of  Roman  Catholics,  an- 
elent  and  modera,  resting  solely  upon  her  authority,  and  that  we  re- 
tain the  bible,  {one  venion  cf  which  ahe  hat,)  is  incontestable  proof, 
that  we  receive  the  bible  on  other  authority  than  her  traditions.  Dis- 
pose of  this  fact  who  may,  I  afikm  that  my  opnonent  never  can !  Thia 
illustrious  and  indisputable  fact,  places  in  bold  relief  the  inelevaney 
of  his  effort  to  show,  that  our  faith  in  the  bible,  and  his  belief  in  Pe- 
ter's Roman  diocese,  or  in  his  being  bishop  ok  Rome,  rest  upon  the 
same  authority.  That  I  must  believe  a  letter  on  the  authority  of  him 
who  carries  it,  or  a  book  on  the  authority  of  him  who  pota  it  in  my 
hand,  ia  another  of  the  assumptions  of  the  chureh  of  encroachments, 
resting  upon  Peter's  having  been  biahop  of  Rome. 

God  created  both  the  sun  and  the  human  eye,  and  he  baa  adapted 
them  to  eaeh  other.  He  created  the  human  nndentandiaf  and  tho 
bible,  and  adapted  them  to  each  other.  The  honest  student  of  nature 
needs  no  tradition  to  prove  that  man  made  not  the  aun ;  neither  doea 
the  humble  and  candid  student  of  the  bible,  need  any  witneas  firom  tho 
bishops  or  church  of  Rome,  that  they  did  nol  make  the  bible.  She  is,  in- 
deed, a  witneaa  for  the  bible,  and  the  trae  chureh,  aomewhere  elae  ex- 
iating  than  in  her  own  communion :  for,  had  it  not  been  for  her  rivals, 
who,  like  Argus,  have  ever  watched  the  aacred  text,  how  it  would 
l^ve  been  interpolated  and  corrapted,  her  editions  of  the  nrimitiye  fh- 
theis,  and  other  books  of  which  she  waa  the  sole  or  chief  depository, 
abundantly  declare.  But,  having  fixed  the  date,  not  merely  of  the  firat 
pope,  but  of  the  grand  schism  which  originateil  the  Roman  Catholie 
ehureh.  I  haaten,  with  all  despatch,  to  show  that  we  have  copiea  of  tho 
w9  17 


Him  gnnd  leliisai,  wmm  todeet  ttraa  the  irm 
wops:  Mv,  tlMt  were  writtmi  htfom  Om  iffamAm  of  a  snpraiiM  liMid 
Mgwi  to  bo  ilMMMod  {  tml  whieli  oopioo,  in  tiio  form  of  tfaiioeiiiition, 
■■••  »•••'  *■•«  oollod  by  Um  Aofirs  of  a  monk.  I  load  bm  m  few 
iooiHMMi,  m  I  ba^e  but  litde  time  for  this  subjeet;  but  I  read  them 
iMi  a  aoufoo  of  biblical  ■■iiiiitj,  which,  on  thoae  iiointt,  has  not 
boon,  and,  I  praaiimo,  will  not  be,  dls|Hrtod  5  •*  Horne'a  IntrodacUon : 
•^f  tiM  imammmaipu  kmmu  to  be  •kteot,  which  oontaia  the  Gnek  Scrip- 

IK!  ^illlll!^  .kH^!!?r"*'  PT^'**  *«.  ^  ,S«ptwfiiit  wtbii.  end  tfie 
ifew  TettMoeot)  there  ere  two  which  pre-emmentlj  demaiid  the  etteotion  of 
the  Bibliod  atndeat  for  their  tntioQitir  and  lotrmtic  vdne,  wh.    The  Aiezaodriu 
muicriiit,whieh>|iffeMrrediii  the  Britbh  nraseum,  end  the  Vatican  muiiiKript 
depoiiled  in  the  libniy  of  the  Vatkui  Falace  at  Rome.  ^ 

^u**,!?**?^^^''"^'^'''*"^^  if  noted  by 

the laMw  A  in  Wetitein>  aad  Gneebach't  critical  editiouof  the  New  Terti 
■■eat,  contistt  of  four  folio  vottuneta  the  three  first  contain  thewhole  of  the  Old 
Teetameot,  together  with  the  Apocnrpbal  books,  end  the  fourth  comprises  the 
Hew  Teatament,  the  itst  epiiHe  of  Clement  to  the  Corinthtans,  and  t^e  Adoc 
jyCTP"*™*,  escribed  to  SoIommid.  In  the  New  TeMament  thera  b  wutinrtlM 
■'•!flP'""i  ••  *'  ••  Matth.  Mtr.  «.  •  p*t^9»H  imrm^i  likewise  from  John  vi.  S6.  to 
•i*.  i^and  finora  the  t  Cor.  if.  13,  to  »ii.  T.  [Thit  manoscript  is  now  preterrad 

ESj?r2llS*^f"*£:f ""J^'^n"*  ? ™.***P<»»'«* '»  "«?•  It  wassentes  .Pesent  to 
!Mi  TrT  *•"«»«  Cjnllits  Locens,  a  naUve  of  Crete,  and  patriarch  of  Con- 
■lantinople.  by  Sir  Thoroat  Rowe,  ambassador  from  Enrland  to  the  Grand  Sein* 
ior,i«  ibe  year  im.  Cyrilins  brought  it  with  him  from  Alexandria,  wb^, 
'  poiWft  It  was  written.  In  a  schedule  annexed  to  it,  he  rives  this  account; 
Mat  it  was  written,  as  tradition  infotnad  them,  by  Thecia,  a  noble  Ecyptiaii 
ladj,  ahoot  thirteen  hnndred  yeait  ago,  a  little  after  the  council  of  Nic?.  Ho 
adds  that  the  name  of  Thecla  at  the  end  of  the  book  was  erased:  but  that  this 
*¥<^.cy  "^  oAer  books  of  the  Christiana,  after  ehristianily  was  extin- 
guM  IB  Eiprpt  byihe  Mohammrdans;  and  that  raeant  tradition  ra^rds  the  iact 
of  the  Iteration  and  eraMteof  Thecla'sname.  The  proprietor  of  this  manuscript, 
befora  it  came  into  the  hands  of  Cyrillna  Locaris.  bad  written  an  Arabic  suV 
acription,  expessing  that^this  book  was  said  to  have  been  written  with  the  pea 
of  Theek  the  martyr."  rintrodnction  to  the  critical  stndv  and  knowlcdae  of 
•ha  Holy  Seriptnrea,  by  fhomas  Hartwelt  Horne.  Vol.  IL  ppTSfi,  SlT    *^ 

Bot,  this  It  not  the  only  nwii  papiatical  mannaoript  of  the  aoripta  re. 
";Miw 'Oitaat. 

II.  -Tra  Cmm  VAncANUS,  No.  1209.  which  Wetstein  and  Grieabach 
hnva  boib  naipd  with  the  letter  B,  contests  the  palm  of  antiquity  with  the  Alex- 
aadrmn  nrannmpt.  No  facsimile  of  it  has  ever  been  pabUshed.  The  Roman 
adition  of  the  Septnagint.  prtated  in  1590,  professes  to  exhibit  the  text  of  this 
■MUnteript;  and  fo  the  preiMre  to  that  edition  it  is  stated  to  have  been  written 
before  the  year  M7. 1,  a.  townrda  tha  aiaaa  of  the  4th  eentniy:  Montfoncon 
and  Bl^ini  refer  jt  to  tha  Sth  <Nr  ith^caatwy,  and  Da  PSa  to  the  7th  cen. 
Iny.  IMisantHaghas  OMleavoredtoahev  that  it  was  written  in  the  aarlv 
part  of  tha  foarth  centniy ;  bet,  from  tha  omission  of  the  Easebiaa  •i^mKmm  nod 
•»v».«n  BHdiop  Mai^  fioaclndes  with  great  probabUity.  that  it  was  written  be- 
iwa  tha  close  of  the  ffth  cantniv.  The  Vatican  maanseript  is  written  on  parch* 
■jnt  or  fnikm  le  eaaial  or  Capital  iettera.  In  three  cobmra  on  each  paga^^l  of 
m^araaltha  mm  aaa,  axcapt  at  the  begbniaf  of  a  book,  and  without  aay 
dlvwoas  of  chapters,  Tanea.  or  words,  but  mth  acccnte  and  spirits.  Tha  shape 
of  the  letters,  and  color  of  the  mk.  prove  that  it  was  written  thronghont  by  one 
aadthe  same  carefiil  copyist**    Id.  ib.  p.  74.  ^ 

Tliefe  aie  alao  Yeraiona  older  than  the  papaey,  older  than  the  fid- 
gale,  which  is  itself  eridently  older  tiian  the  ohnicb  of  Rome. 

••Syria  being  visited  at  a  very  early  period  by  tha  piaachaia  of  tha  christian 
Ml*  several  transhitioaB  of  tha  saciad  volame  waia  made  into  the  laaftnace  of 
■mm  matry.  The  most  calebtaled  of  these  is  the  PtteJUlo  or  IMwS^inrtw 
JasfJ**,)  as  It  IS  nsmllir  called,  oa  account  of  its  very  close  adherence  to  Oia 
Hebrew  text,  from  which  it  was  immediately  made.  The  most  extravacant  as- 
lerttom  hava  bean  advanced  conoamiag  its  antiqnity,  soma  rtforring  it  to  tha 


BOMAH  f  ATBOUC   RWJGION. 

lime  of  Solomon  and.Hirani,  whUe  others  ascribe  it  to  A»a^  the  mjest  of  Sama- 
ritans, and  a  third  class,  to  the  apostle  Thaddeui.  This  last  tradition  is  receiv. 
ed  by  the  Syrian  churches;  but  a  more  recent  date  is  ascribed  to  it  by  modern 
bibliad  philolorars.  Bishop  Walton.  Carpeovi  Lewden.  Bishop  Lowth.  and 
Dr.  Kennicott.  Ix  its  date  to  the  first  oeotary ;  Bauer,  and  some  other  German 
critics,  to  the  second  or  third  century:  Jaho  fixes  it  at  the  Utest,  to  the  second 
century:  De  Rossi  pronounces  it  to  be  very  ancient  but  does  not  specify  any 
nrecue  date.  The  most  probable  opinion  is  that  of  Michaelis,  who  ascribes  it  to 
Iheclose  of  the  first  or  to  the  eariier  part  of  the  second  century,  at  which  time 
the  Syrian  churches  flourished  most,  and  the  christians  at  Edessa  bad  a  temple 
for  divine  worship  erected  after  the  model  of  that  at  Jerusalem:  and  it  is  not  to 
ha  topposed  that  they  would  be  without  a  version  of  the  old  Testoment.  tba 
taadimc  of  which  had  been  introduced  by  the  apostles."    Id.  ib.  pp.  187,  l»»- 

••  An  important  accession  to  biblical  literature  was  made  a  few  years  since,  by 
the  late  learned  and  excellent  Dr.  Buchanan,  to  whose  assiduous  labors  tbe 
British  chnrch  in  India  is  most  deeply  indebted:  and  who,  in  his  progress 
unong  the  Syrian  churches  and  Jews  of  India,  discovered  and  obtained  numa 
roas  ancient  manascripU  of  the  scriptures,  which  are  now  deposited  in  the  onb- 
lic  library  at  Cambridge.  One  of  these,  which  was  discovered  In  a  remote  Syn- 
an  charch  near  the  mountains,  is  particularly  valuable:  it  contains  the  old  and 
new  Testements,  engrossed  with  beautiful  accuracy  in  the  Estrangao  (or  old 
Syriac.)  character,  on  strong  vellum,  in  large  folio,  and  having  three  colunine  in 
n  pare.  The  words  of  every  book  are  numbered:  and  the  volume  illuminated, 
btttnot  after  the  European  manner,  the  initial  letters  having  no  ornament. 
Thomrh  somewhat  injured  by  time  or  neglect,  the  mk  being  fn  certain  places 
oblitSated,  still  the  letters  can,  in  general,  be  distinctly  traced  from  the  im- 
press  of  the  pen,  or  from  the  partial  corrosion  of  the  ink.  The  Syrian  church  w- 
siens  a  high  elate  to  this  manuscript,  which  in  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Yeates.  who 
hu  publiihed  a  collation  of  the  Pentoteach,  was  written  about  thesevcmth 
centi^.  In  lookmg  over  this  manuscript.  Dr.  Buchanan  found  the  y^rj  first 
emendation  of  the  Hebrew  text  proposed  by  Dr.  Kennicott,  which  doabtless  is 
the  true  reading.    Id.  16.  p.  189.  .  ..,,-..•. 

Now,  if  we  of  the  west  of  Europe,  did  receive  the  bible  first  ftom 
our  Roman  Catholic  ancestors,  I  ask,  wonld  that  make  ns  denendent 
on  their  traditions  alone  for  that  book ;  any  more  than  A.  B.,  who 
lived  on  one  of  the  seven  months  of  the  Nile,  from  which  he  supplies 
himself  with  water,  was,  on  that  account,  absolutely  dependent  on  the 
branch  nearest  his  dwelling.  Tell  him  that  he  is  absolutely  and  alone 
dependent  on  it  for  water ;  and  he  will  say,  "  No ;  but  it  is  more  «m- 

•  venieni  to  supply  myself  firom  this  stream :  there  are  six  other  branch- 
es, from  which  I  could  supply  myself,  were  it  necessary  for  my  life  or 
comfort."  So  say  we.  We  have  Jews,  Greeks,  Armenians,  and  Pro- 
testants, from  the  first  schism,  A.  D.  350,  down  to  the  present  day; 
to  say  nothing  of  the  ancient  sceptics,  Celsus,  Porphyry,  Julian,  and 
others  ;  and  3ie  ancient  heretics,  from  whose  writing,  together  with 

'  those  of  the  infidel  pagans,  we  could  almost  compile  a  New  Testa- 

•  ment,  containing  every  fliing  read,  not  only  since,  hut  before  the  conn- 
'  cil  of  Laodicea.  Du  Pin  himself  acknowledges,  that  before  that  coun- 
cil, even  in  the  third  century,  the  scriptures  were  read  as  they  are  now. 

'  But,  as  for  our  independence  of  all  Roman  Catholic  tradition,  on  this 

•  subject,  many  other  proofh  may  be  offered.  The  notorious  and  glorious 
fact,  however,  that  Protestants  have  rejected  the  Roman  Catholic  rule 
of  faith,  apociypha,  traditions,  and  all,  and  even  her  own  vulgate,  as 

'  auttentic,  will  for  ever  frown  out  of  countenance,  the  |roundless  im- 
putations of  my  too  credulous  opponent.   [Time  expired.  J 

'•^  ,  Ha^past  3  d'dock,  F.  JC 

Bishop  PUECKLL  rises— 

My  friends,  have  you  ever  seen  the  Anti-Christ  1   Look  at  him  now 
(holding  up  a  hook.)    This  morning,  1  endeavored  to  shew  that  Ma- 


vhatb  oil  vm. 

hmm»i  wag  iU  iMMt  liMst,  to  iUutntt  the  myMwioiis  fffopheeTt 
•Dd  I  stated  tiut  many  maaa  (Imirteeii)  ooold  be  Ibiiwi  to  corfes|iofiil 
witk  the  Domliers  €66.  I  now  aistiiietly  abew  the  page  aad  book, 
wiien  tbe  computatioe  ia  made  and  the  laat  of  theae  aamea  ia  that  of 
God  himaelf.  Cefdomii,  a  Greek  writer,  Hetliea  that  the  name  of 
Mahoiiiaedv  as  it  waa  written  in  hia  time,  wiU  exactly  apdl  the  beaat. 
Oa  thia  aobjeet,  the  reader  who  ia  not  eonlent  witk  tie  article,  Anti- 
Uhnat,  in  Bobtnaon'a  Calmet,  may  refer  to  Walmealey'a  General  Hia- 
IMV  of  tiie  Chriatian  ehonsh,  p.  S60. 

I  do  not  fife  my  own  tiieoir  of  tiie  matter.  There  hate  been  too 
■lamr  tbeonata  akmdy^  to  need  more.  I  belie¥e  tiie  beast  was  neitiier 
Mttir,  nor  Mahoinmed,  nor  tiie  pope.  Thia  ia  not  an  article  of  faith 
with  me,  nor  witia  any  Catiiolic.  I  reapeet  tiie  prophecy,  hot  I  await 
to  deeiile  the  iineatiooa  until  •  RoTelationa'  he  what  tiie  term  importa. 
I  iavt  haii  a  history  of  the  popea,  in  Freneh,  pabliahed,  aa  the  titie 
paM  aaya  «•!  tiie  expense  of  tiie  holy  Father."  Of  eoorae  it  is  to  be 
ondaiatood  to  be  a  hoax,  and  it  deaenres  to  be  ao  eooaideied.    It  telle 

f  "SSP.*^  'i?  *'*®"*  ¥™  '*  ■"*^  ^•"  he  waa  to  be  deatroyed  for  oTet 

Ml  17«ib    We  may  then  write  lua  epitaph. 

I  ito  MH  know  on  what  ffoanda  my  friend  asaerted  yeaterday,  thai 
lie  Sni.  ooramandment  wia  not  a  part  of  tiie  Catiiolic  mle  of  morala 
Ikat e  alnrady  exhibited  Yariooa  eateehiaaa,  in  use  in  tiie  United 
malea,  in  all  of  which,  every  word  of  tiie  eommandmenta  ia  found.  1 
■nppoae  my  friend  ovtiiooked  tiie  fact.  I  waa  dad  to  hear  the  flentie. 
■^  mak  80  highly  of  M ichaelia.   It  ahowed  his  literary  knowledge  | 

lit  of  hia  voika  eovld  be  obtained  in  Paria,  in  1694, 1  proenied  it 

°?  «  bappaM  by  a  aingular  coincideoce,  unknown  to  him,  to  be.  I 

Wile  him  to  exaaiiae  ialt  tiie  eommandmenta,  and  he  will  find  tiiem 

llY  aiMl  ^th^|l|;  nmd«nA  in  every  Catiiolic  Bible  and  Teatameni 

very  diA 

M^*"  Jl^'*  K«ae»^W7aa1Lf"^t  to  know,  tiiat  ia  tim  oM 
JMiiiew  Bible,  there  ia  no  diviaion  of  vaiaea,  moeh  leaa  of  ehapteraf 
TTiat  a  Roman  Cadidie  cardinal  had  a  good  deal  to  do  in  making  tiie 
diviaioifr-^nd  tiiat  tiiey  were  not  Proleatanta,  botRabbis,  who  suffixed 
tia  points  which  senre  instead  of  vowala  to  Hebrew  words,  which 
Mve  ime  bat  ooiaenattta  alone;  aecoidii^y,  aa  theae  vowela  ai» 

UHT*  Z^"7!^!?^  f^y  "K^'^y  whatever  tiie  jm'filcr  pleaaeal 
oa  mini  or  the  oldeal  known  meaning  mvat  be  tiie  only  criterion. 
But  lAoold  hke  to  know  how  one  of  our  ffood,  plain,  homebied  and 
■■•■■iriona  eWaaM  eaa  aceaiiah  tiiia  taak  for  himaelf.  Even  lean* 
•i  men  made  themaalvea  ridlMlMa  by  thtk  maaoietic  fixtniea  and 
tiaiialatlons,  and  Lutiier,  who  waa  a  good  QtOolk  aeholai^anghing 
at  y>«  muidity  of  their  veraiona  ef  paaaagea  in  tiie  Bible— obaerved 
that  "In  tiie  beginaiiig  tiia  euckoo  ale  tiie  apanow  and  tiie  featiieia,** 

rSSi"  ^T  Ti  «T*  •  tt««l«ti<«,«^«h*  fiii»  line  ^  OmmdM,  aa  aoma 
of  iheiia.    I  wtil  return  to  thia  aubject. 

It  appeara  tiiat  Birda  and  Beaata  of  prey  may  repreaent  peace,  at 

well  aa  cruelly.    England  tiien  auffima  ao  diaparagement  from  her 


mmuM  CATHOLIC  sxuoion. 


961 


Wffl  ■!  iiend  tell  tiie  andienoe  when  tiie  sMsordte  noifili,  witiioul 
-"ik  *•  «nderatanding  of  tiie  Bible,  if  not 
were  firal  introduced  1  and  by  whom  I 


I,  nor  the  United  Btatea,  from  her  Eagle.    The  gentiemaa  auff- 
99^  •  <i»**  iMT  tiie  latter.    I  hmve  boI  tiia  alightaai  o^ei^  and  M 


the  criticism  I  have  heard  be  correct,  the  bird  lately  stamped  on  th«  new 
American  coin  resembles  a  chicken,  more  than  a  bird  of  prey,  it  looka 
as  if  it  were  more  to  be  preyed  npon  than  preying,  and  more  ainned 
against  than  sinning. 

Before  I  come  to  the  very  important  point  of  the  Bible,  1  meat  not 
forget  to  quote  the  testimony  of  the  eloquent  Southey,  to  shew  what 
anti-Christs  the  popes  were,  and  how  they  displayed  their  anti-ehrist* 
ian  spirit,  in  the  conversion  of  Old  England. 

••  Tn«t  Ciregory,  who  was  afterward*  raited  to  tfie  poptNloBt  "nd  if  dieti*- 
e«iih«)  from  »ucceedii«  popes  of  the  same  narae  (one  alone  excepted,)  by 
the  fwik  of  saint,  and  trooi  bim,  by  the  appellation  of  the  Great,  was  one  dav 
led  into  the  market-place  at  Rome,  with  a  great  concourse  of  persons,  to  look 
at  a  large  importation  of  foreign  roerchandite,  which  had  just  arrired.  Among 
other  articles,  there  were  some  boys  exposed  for  sale  like  cattle.  There  waa 
nothing  remarkable  in  this,  for  it  was  the  custom  every  where  in  that  age,  and 
had  been  so  from  time  immemorial:  but  he  was  struck  by  the  appearance  of  tbe 
boysf  tbeir  fine  clear  skins,  the  beauty  of  their  flaxen  or  golden  hnir,  and  their 
inaenuoos  countenances;  so  that  he  asked  from  what  countnr  they  came;  and 
when  be  was  told  from  the  island  of  Briuin,  when  the  inhabitants  ia  general 
wera  of  that  complexion  and  comeliness,  he  inquired  if  the  people  were  chna- 
tians,  and  sighed  for  compassion  at  hearing  that  they  were  in  a  state  of  P^:ub 

darknett. From  that  day  the  conversion  of  the  Anglo-Saxons  became  a 

Ikvorite  object  with  Gregory Accordingly  he  despatched  thither 

forty  missionaries  from  a  monatfery,  which  he  had  founded  at  Rome.  .  .  .  .  .  . 

When,  therefore,  Augustine  (who  was  their  chief)  and  his  companions  landed 
in  the  Isle  of  Thanet,  they  came  not  at  obscure  men,  unprotected  and  nnaccrad- 
ited;  but  with  recommendations  from  the  kings  of  France,  «nd  as  <nf*^^^>S^ 
froM  a  potentate,  whose  spiritual  authority  was  acknowledged  and  <weyed 
throughout  that  part  of  the  world,  to  which  the  uoilhern  mtions  were  accw- 
tomed  to  look  aa  the  seat  of  empire  and  superior  civiliiation.  They  madetbeir 
arrival  known  to  Ethelbert,  and  requested  an  audience.  They  approached  ra 
procession,  bearing  a  silver  crucifix,  and  a  portrait  of  our  Savior,  upon  a  baa- 
iier  adorned  witii  gold,  and  chaunling  the  litany.  Tbe  king  welcom«l  ^tm  ccur- 
leoatly.  and  oidered  them  to  be  seated:  aftec  which,  Augottme  stood  up,  and, 
through  an  interpreter,  whom  he  had  brought  from  France,  delivered  the  pur- 
port of  his  mission,  in  a  brief,  but  well  ordered  and  impressive  discourM.  Ha 
was  come  to  the  king,  and  to  that  kingdom,  he  said,  for  their  eternal  good,  a 
messenger  of  good  tidings;  offering  to  their  acceptance  peipetual  bappincta, 
hero  and  hereafter,  if  tiiey  would  accept  his  wordi.  The  Creator  and  Redeemer 
had  opened  the  kiagdom  of  heaven  to  the  human  race:  for  God  so  loved  tha 
worid  that  he  had  sent  into  it  his  only  son,  as  that  son  himself  testified,  to  be- 
come a  man  among  the  children  of  men,  and  suffer  death  upon  the  ««>»»»« 
atonement  for  their  sfnt.  That  incarnate  divinity  bad  beea  made  manifest  by 
inamnerable  miracles.  Christ  had  stilled  Uie  winds  and  waves,  and  walked  nooa 
th«  watera:  he  bad  healed  diseases,  and  restored  Uie  dead  to  hfe:  finallv.hahad 
risen  from  the  dead  himself,  that  we  might  rise  again  through  him,  and  had  m- 
candad  into  heaven,  that  he  might  receive  us  there  in  his  gloiy;  tod  he  would 
come  again  to  judge  both  the  quick  and  the  dead.  -  TPhink  not,**  he  procacdad, 
••O  iBMt  excellent  king,  that  we  are  rapetttitioas,  because  we  haft  coma  fron 
RoMe  into  thy  dominions,  for  the  take  of  the  salvation  of  thaa  aad  of  thy  peo- 
m%i  w  have  done  this,  being  constrained  by  great  love:  for  that  which  we  da- 
tk%  above  ail  tiia  pomps  anJdelighta  of  this  world,  is  to  have  «ir  feHow-CTaa- 
tares  partaken  with  ourselves  in  Uie  kmgdoai  of  heaven,  Ac.**  [Southey  s  Book 
of  the  Church,  chap.  iii.  p.  53.  etc.  ,^^ 

My  friend  propoaed  a  qipeation,  which  he  thought  diiSenlt.  Wliy 
do  I  believe  the  bible!  He  said  my  anawer  would  be,  because  tiie 
church  believes  it ;  and  this,  he  says,  is  like  Peter  giving  a  character 
to  Paul,  and  Paul  to  Peter.  I  reciprocate  the  queation  of  the  gentie- 
man,  and  he  says  he  believes  in  the  church,  because  he  believes  in  the 
bible.  Thus  the  bible  and  church  testify  to  eaeh  other  in  his  theory, 
and  the  difficulty  ia  infinitely  gieater  for  a  Proteatant,  tiian  for  a  Ca- 


gnt    mpmm 


IIm  ittMt  liMft,  to  illittnle  tlra  myflMioM  propheej; 
■od  I  tttted  that  many  naniet  (foartmo)  eooM  be  fomid  to  conospoiMl 
witk  tiM  munliera  €66.  I  now  dktinetly  shew  the  page  aad  bocrik, 
when  the  eonputatioii  it  maiie  and  the  last  of  theea  namea  ia  that  of 
God  himaelf.  Cefdenia,  a  Greek  writer,  teatillea  that  the  name  of 
MahonuBed,  aa  it  waa  written  in  hia  time,  will  eiaelly  apell  the  beaat. 
On  thia  aobject,  the  reader  who  ia  not  content  with  the  article,  Anti- 
Ohfitt,  ia  MiliMB'a  Calmet,  may  relef  to  Walnealey'a  General  Hit- 
toij  of  the  Chrlatian  choreh,  p.  S50. 

I  do  not  |iTe  my  own  theorr  of  the  matter.  There  ha?e  been  too 
many  theonata  ahrtady,  to  need  more.  I  beliere  the  beast  was  neither 
Lather,  nor  Mahommed,  nor  the  pone.  Thia  ia  not  an  article  of  faith 
wiih  me,  nor  with  any  Catholic.  I  leapeet  the  prophecy,  but  I  await 
to  decide  the  qnestiona  nntal  •  ReTclatiooa*  be  what  the  term  importa. 
I  have  heia  a  hiatoiy  of  the  popes,  in  French,  published,  as  the  title 
fm  aift  ••  at  the  espenae  of  the  holy  Father.*'  Of  course  it  is  to  b« 
nnieiitood  to  he  a  hoax,  and  it  deaerrea  to  he  so  considered.  It  tells 
a  heap  of  Ilea  about  him ;  amonf  othera  he  waa  to  be  destroyed  for  cTei 
in  ITlSb    We  may  thm  write  his  epitaph. 

I  do  not  know  on  what  fronnds  my  friend  asserted  yesterday,  thai 
the  Snd.  cemBandment  was  not  a  part  of  the  Catholie  rale  of  morala 
I  have  already  exhibited  variona  catechisms,  in  use  in  the  United 
Stalea,  in  aU  of  wiiich,  every  word  of  the  oommandmenta  ia  found.  I 
auppoee  m§  ftiend  overlooked  the  lact.  I  waa  glad  to  hear  the  gentle, 
man  apaik  m  highly  of  Michaelia.  It  showed  hia  literary  knowledge  i 
and  peihapa  he  may  be  intereated  in  knowing  that  when  but  one  edi- 
tioii  of  hia  woika  could  be  obtnined  in  Paris,  in  1834, 1  procured  it. 
Hero  it  happena  by  a  siii|alar  coincidence,  unknown  to  him,  to  be.  I 
invite  him  to  exasune  in  it  the  commandments,  and  he  will  find  them 
lullv  and  iu thiblly  rendered  in  every  Catholic  Bible  and  Testament 
Will  mv  firlend  tell  the  audience  when  the  moxordie  notnli,  without 
lihieh  the  nndaiatanding  of  the  Bible,  if  not  impoaaible,  is  very  difll 


eHl|'"iiiii  first  intmtaned  I  and  by  whom  t 

Ho  all  Bible  readeia  know,  aa  they  ought  to  know,  that  in  the  old 
Mehiev  Bible,  there  ia  no  diviaion  or  veraes,  much  leaa  of  chapteral 
Hal  a  loman  Catholin  cardinal  had  a  good  deal  to  do  in  making  the 
diffiaion— 4ind  that  they  were  not  Protestants,  but  Rabbis,  who  suffixed 
the  pninia  which  iifve  inatsad  of  vowela  to  Hebrew  words,  which 
hapt'"  .Mne  but  conaonanta  al<one;  accordingly,  aa  theae  vowels  are 
plaetd,  the  Hebrew  root  may  aignify  whatever  the  jMinfer  pleaaea  f 
Tha  context  of  the  oldeal  known  meaning  mnat  he  die  only  criterion. 
Bit  I  ahould  ike  to  know  how  mm  of  our  good,  plain,  homebred  and 
indaatrioos  eltiaena  can  aoeoapliah  thia  taai  for  himaelf.  Even  letfi- 
ad  mm  made  tha»aalvaa  iidienloaa  hy  their  maioretic  fixturea  and 


inualations,  and  Luther,  who  waa  a  good  CMMk  scholar— laughing 
at  Ihe  ahaurdity  of  their  vorsionB  of  naaaagea  in  the  Bible— obaerved 


thai  Mil  the  beginning  the  cuckoo  ato  the  aparrow  and  the  featbeia,'* 
vonid  be  joataa  good  a  tranalataon  of  the  fimtllneof  Geneaia,aaaonw 
•fiheirs.    I  wUI  ratara  to  thia  aubject. 

it  appeara  that  Birda  and  Beaata  of  prey  may  repreaent  peace,  at 
well  aa  cruel^.  England  then  auffera  no  dianaragement  from  her 
Lion,  nor  the  United  Btatea,  from  her  Eagle.  The  gsntiemaa  snf> 
geeto  «  dove  fee  the  lattor.    1  have  not  lit  aligfateat  ejection,  and  if 


wntAH  CATnoLic  scLioioir. 


961 


the  criticism  I  have  heard  be  correct,  the  bird  lately  stamped  on  th«  n^ 
American  coin  resembles  a  chicken,  more  than  a  bird  of  prey.  It  looka 
as  if  it  were  more  to  be  preyed  upon  than  preying,  and  more  sinned 
against  than  sinning. 

Before  I  come  to  the  very  Important  point  of  the  Bible,  I  nrast  not 
Ib^t  to  quote  the  testimony  of  the  eloquent  Southey,  to  shew  what 
anti-Chrisis  the  popes  were,  and  how  they  displayed  their  antt-^ris*- 
ian  spirit,  in  the  convereion  of  Old  England.  _i  •  j-  • 

••  That  Gregory,  who  wm  •fterwwtif  niied  to  th«  popedom,  and  m  OMtia* 
aaished  from  succeedinr  popes  of  the  wme  naaie  (one  alone  exceptei*.)  by 
the  TMk  of  saint,  and  horn  htm,  by  the  appellation  of  the  Great,  was  one  dav 
kd  ialo  the  market-place  at  Rome,  with  a  great  concourw  of  persons,  to  look 
wX  a  large  importatbn  of  foreign  merchandise,  which  had  just  arrived.  Among 
other  articles,  there  were  some  boys  exposed  for  sale  like  cattle.  There  was 
nothing  remarkable  in  this,  for  it  was  the  custom  every  where  m  that  «g«. » 
Ind  been  so  from  time  immemorial:  bot  he  was  struck  by  the  appearance  of  tba 
boys,  their  fine  clear  skins,  the  beauty  of  their  flaxen  or  golden  bair,  and  their 
MMreauoos  countenances;  so  that  he  asked  from  what  countnr  they  came;  and 
when  he  was  told  from  the  island  of  Britoin,  where  the  inhabitants  IB  general 
were  of  that  complexion  and  comeliness,  be  inquired  if  the  people  were  chris- 
tians, and  sighed  for  compassion  at  hearing  that  they  were  in  a  state  of  Pagan 

darkness From  that  day  the  conversion  of  the  Anglo-Saxons  be<^me  a 

lavorite  object  with  Gregory Accordingly  he  despatched  thither 

forty  missionaries  from  a  monatfery,  which  he  had  founded  at  Rome.  .  •  •  •  •; 

When,  therefore,  Augustine  (who  was  their  chief)  and  his  companions  ianded 
in  the  Isle  of  Thanet,  they  came  not  as  obscure  men,  unprotected  and  unaccred- 
ited; but  with  recommendations  from  the  kings  of  France,  and  as  messengers 
from  a  potentate,  whose  spiritual  authority  was  acknowledged  and  obeyed 
throughout  that  part  of  the  world,  to  which  the  northern  nations  were  accus- 
tomed to  look  as  the  seat  of  empire  and  superior  civiliiation.  They  made  tbeir 
arrival  known  to  Ethelbert,  and  requested  an  audience.  They  approached  in 
orocession.  bearing  a  silver  crucifix,  and  a  portrait  of  pur  Savior,  upon  a  ban- 
£er  adorned  with  gold,  and  cbannting  the  litany.  The  king  welcomed  ^emconr. 
teonsly.  and  ordered  them  to  be  seated:  aftec  which.  Augustine  stood  up,  and. 
through  an  interpreter,  whom  he  had  brought  from  France,  delivered  the  pur- 
port of  his  mission,  in  a  brief,  but  well  ordered  and  impressive  a»«co«"Vi** 
was  come  to  the  king,  and  to  that  kingdom,  he  said,  for  their  eternal  good,  n 
messenger  of  good  tidings;  oflfering  to  their  acceptance  perpetual  hapi>»"«^ 
here  and  hereaTter,  if  they  would  accept  his  words.  The  Creator  and  R^fef*" « 
had  opened  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  the  human  race:  for  God  ■?  loved  tba 
world  that  he  had  sent  into  it  his  only  son,  as  that  son  himself  testified,  to  be- 
come a  man  among  the  children  of  men,  and  suffer  death  upon  the  cross,  m 
atonement  for  their  sfns.  That  incarnate  dirinity  had  been  made  manifeest  nj 
innumerable  miracles.  Christ  had  stilled  the  winds  and  ™«f?  •«^.'^«JJ~  "CS 
th«  waters:  he  had  healed  diseases,  and  restored  the  dead  to  life:  finallv,  he  had 
risen  from  the  dead  himself,  that  we  might  rise  again  throueh  him,  and  had  s»- 
cendMl  into  heaven,  that  be  might  receive  us  there  >n  hi»  glorj;  V^  "*J!5"lf 
come  again  to  judge  both  the  quick  and  the  dead.  -  Think  not,"  he  procaeded, 
••  O  nost  excellent  king,  that  we  are  superttitiont,  because  we  have  coina  Iroa 
Ro«a  into  thy  dominions,  for  the  sake  of  the  salvatioa  of  thee  and  of  thy  pcn- 
^;  wa  have  done  this,  being  constrained  by  great  love:  for  that  which  we  dn- 
are.  ihova  all  the  pomps  and  delighU  of  this  world,  is  to  have  our  feHow-^raa. 
torn  partakeia  withouirselves  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  &c.'*  [Southey  »s  Book 
of  the  Church,  chap.  iii.  p.  23.  etc.  «n^ 

My  friend  proposed  a  «ine8tion,  which  he  thought  difllenlt.  wny 
do  I  believe  the  bible!  He  said  my  anawer  wonid  he,  becanse  the 
choreh  believes  it ;  and  this,  he  says,  is  like  Peter  priving  a  character 
to  Paul,  and  Paul  to  Peter.  I  reciprocate  the  question  of  the  gentle- 
man, and  he  says  he  belieyes  in  the  chnreh,  becauae  hebelieTes  in  the 
bible.  Thus  the  bible  and  church  testify  to  each  other  in  his  theory, 
and  the  difficulty  ia  infinitely  greater  for  a  Protestant,  than  for  a  Ca- 


I 


WMBJkTE  cnr  ma. 

'lAilit.'  ''bfaet,'l«r«l)iiiMlii<;li0iiiiMltoii  k  not  latccptilile  of  anf 
iiftoulty,  whaumwm.  One  word  will  show  that  we  ara  right.  Which 
mm,  FMoal  Tho  bible  or  the  churchl  Manifeailj,  the  church  waa  the 
older.  The  afioatlie  did  not  wait  lo  have  thousanda  of  bibles  copied, 
aad  to  Mghtfiaaila  iiiih  themt  and  aail  as  aupeicarg  oea  of  the  boa- 
wenly  merdiaiidiiey  to  the  diatant  aationa  of  the  earth.  **  Jhttt,**  i^|fa 
8t.  Paul,  *^mmm  from  heming,^^  There  were  milliooa  of  converta  to 
Chriatiaiiity,  whole  nations  were  converted  to  the  Savior,  by  premk' 
Imy,  belbte  the  diiereiii  books  composi off  the  present  bible,  were  do- 
lemined  to  be  eemiine  Sori|iliift  and  collecled  into  one  volume.  This 
was  not  done  b<9bre  the  beginninf  of  the  fourth  century.  The  church 
:  waa  therefoie  prior  to  the  bible :  and  if  the  bible  had  never  been  writ- 
•teOf  th«  foapei  could  have  been  preached  and  believed,  as  it  was  in 
i the  eailf  agea,  without  its  aid.  How  did  the  apoatlea  make  converta 
without  the  bible!  They  addreaaed  themselves  to  the  reason  of  the 
unconverted  nattoos.  They  convinced  tiiem,  if  neoeaaarr,  of  the  ex- 
iatenee  of  Godf  bf  the  spectacle  of  the  divine  wisdom  and  power,  dis- 
played in  the  eieaion  and  preaervation  of  the  worid.  Th^  appealed 
to  the  natural  law,  whooe  pieeepta  were  written  by  the  finger  of  God, 
on  tahieta  of  lleah,  the  hearta  of  men,  before  they  were  engraven  on 
atone,  amidst  the  thunder  and  lightnings  of  Sinai.  Thua  did  they 
ini  the  great  primary  truths  of  natural  religion,  with  regard  to 
both  doctrine  and  morals,  inculcated  by  the  contemplation  of  the 
vialhle  wonders  of  creation  and  the  teatimony  of  the  human  heart. 
They  next  proceeded  to  convince  their  hearers  of  the  unity  of  God, 
and  the  ainfiilness  and  grossnesa  of  idolatry,  of  their  having  departed 
iram  the  moral  law,  of  the  darkness  in  which  sin  had  involved  the 
hunuin  race,  of  our  incompetency  for  our  own  cure,  of  the  divine  com- 
-misentioB  of  our  misery,  of  the  descent  of  Jesus  Christ,  hia  doctrine, 
^hisHilradei,  his  charity,  hia  eatabliahment  of  hia  ehnreh,  his  aaen- 
menta  and  the  various  meana  of  grace,  his  promises  to  be  with  his 
apoatlea,  He  and  hia  Holy  Spirit,  for  ever,  his  death,  &c.  The  holinesa 
iW  the  apoatlea*  lives,  the  cruel  death  with  which  they  sealed  the  truth 
thejhad  proclaimed,  conciliated  the  belief  and  completed  the  conversioH 
of  iieir  hearera.  **  IwiOmg^,^  aays  Paschal,  '•  hdieoe  the  tmlneaMt, 
woko  M  Ikdr  ikroak  h  mi  h  aiieai  ike  iruik  ^  v^  tkey  deelare,^^  The 
bible  could  not  abed  ita  blood  to  attest  its  divine  origin.  The  ignorant, 
who  aie  a  lafge  proportion  of  the  human  race,  could  not  read  it;  the 
learned,  and  &e  pious,  and  the  aincere,  aa  every  one  knows,  found  it 
a  taak  Ikr  above  their  atiength,  to  disttn|||iii8h  genuine  from  apnriooa 
tpiptnre.  Before  the  invention  of  printing,  men  could  not  procure 
;  liliBa:  ainoe  the  inventioii  of  printing,  they  md  them  to  intr^uce  m 
iood  of  new  aeeta ;  ao  that  there  are  now  aa  many  religions,  almost, 
'  aa  there  are  dHlbrent  versiona  or  diifamil  readera  oi  the  acripturea.  If, 
on  the  contrary,  there  ia  anything  clearly  taught  in  the  scriptures,  it  la 
the  authority  of  the  church,  whidi,  without  aid  from  the  bible,  not  all 
•eniposed  when  the  first  apoatlea  preached,  had  fully  eetablished  hte 
authority,  and,  independently  of  her  miracles,  proved,  by  the  prete^ 
natural  success  of  her  preaching,  that  God  waa  indeed  with  her,  as  he 
had  promised,  teaching  all  natiSna,  and  perpetually  suggesUng  to  her 
all  tmlh.  Hence,  we  believe  in  the  church  first;  and  on  the  faith  of 
the  evidiHiea  which  I  have  enuminted,  we  believe  in  the  bible,  which 
the  ehorch  presenta  to  us,  vouching  for  its  purity  and  authenticitj. 


BOMAll  eAVmOtm  BVUOIOH. 

The  bible  obtained,  sanctions  the  authority  of  the  ehorch,  and  confiraM 
our  faith.  Here,  all  is  consistent,  and  oor  submission  to  the  chnreii  is 
loaaonable.  The  Pioteatant  divines.  Hooker  and  Chillingwortb,  allow 
that  the  bible  cannot  bear  teatimony  to  itself:  even  Lather  waa  fiweed 
to  acknowledge  it,    •*  We  are  obliged,*'  aaya  he,  •*  to  yield  nnmy 
thinga  to  the  papists ;  that  with  them  ia  the  word  of  God,  that  we  re> 
ceived  from  them ;  otherwise,  we  should  have  known  nothing  at  all 
about  it."  (Comment  on  John,  c.  16.)     Hence  the  remarkable  saying 
of  St.  Augustine :    "  I  should  not  believe  the  ^pel  itaelf,  if  the 
Catholic  church  did  not  oblige  me  to  do  so."    Will  my  friend  inform 
me,  why  he  rejects  an  authentic  work,  of  great  excellence,  written  by 
St.  Barnabas;  who  is  termed,  in  scripture,  an  apostle,  and  declared  to 
be  full  of  the  holy  Ghost,  (Acts  xiv.  34,  xi.  24 ;)  and  receivea,  as 
canonical,  parte  of  the  New  Testament,  which  were  not  written  by 
apostles  at  all,  viz.  the  gvispels  of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  I  The  original 
text  of  Moses,  and  the  ancient  prophete,  was  destroyed  with  the  tem- 
ple and  city  of  Jerusalem,  by  the  Assyrians  under  Nebucbadnessar;  and 
the  authentic  copies  which  replaced  them,  perished  in  the  persecntton 
of  Antiochus.    How  were  these  books  restored !    Paul  wrote  his 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  entrusted  it  to  the  deaconess  Phcebe.    His 
£pistle  to  the  Ephesians,  he  confided  to  the  disciple  Tychieus.  How 
can  we  be  sure  of  these  epistles,  as  they  now  stand  in  the  Testament! 
Was  it  not  the  corruption  of  the  bible  by  Queen  Elixabeth's  bishops, 
that  caused  James  I.  to  have  a  new  translation  to  be  made  %    But,  1 
should  be  endless,  if  I  enumerated  all  the  insurmountable  difficulties, 
which  a  Protestant  encounters  at  the  very  first  step  of  his  journey  in 
•uest  of  a  religion.     He  mmi  turn  Catholic  at  the  very  outad,  and  take 
•Se  hible,  at  he  gets  tV,  on  authoriiy,  or  remain  an  unbeliever  all  his  life* 
And  he  mmt  believe  thai  mUkoriiy  to  be  infallible,  or  he  can  never  be  sure 
thai  the  bibk  it  gives  him  m  divine.  Catholics  have  faith  by  baptism,  as 
Protestante  have ;  but  the  latter  lose  it  when  they  adopt,  on  arriving 
at  mature  age,  the  Protestant  principle,  that  every  man  must  find  out 
his  religion  for  himself,  firom  the  bible.    Many  Protestants  are  not  ad- 
monished of  the  danger  of  their  situation,  and  do  not  themselves  reflect 
on  these  difficulties.  As  long  as  they  are  sincere,  and  do  the  best  they 
can  to  obey  God  and  conscience,  the  Catholic  church  excuses  them,  in 
the  words  of  St.  Augustine : "  Let  those  treat  you  harshly,  who  know  not 
how  hard  it  is  to  get  rid  of  old  prejudices.    Let  those  treat  you  harshly, 
who  have  not  learned  how  very  hard  it  is  to  purify  the  interior  eye,  and 
render  it  capable  of  contemplating  the  sun  of  the  soul,  truth.    But,  as 
to  us :  we  are  far  from  this  disposition  towarda  persons  who  are  aepar- 
ated  from  us,  not  by  errors  of  their  own  invenUon,  but  by  their  being 
entangled  in  those  of  others.  We  are  so  &r  from  this  diapoeitioo,  that 
we  pray  to  God,  that  in  rafoting  the  false  opinions  of  those  whom  you 
follow,  not  from  malice,  but  from  imprudence,  be  would  bestow  upon 
ua  that  spirit  of  peace,  which  feels  no  other  sentiment  than  charity,  no 
other  interest  than  that  of  Jeaua  Christ,  no  other  wish  bat  for  year 
salvation.*'    Had  we  been  bom  Mahommedans,  we  would,  perhaps, 
live  Mahommedans.    Thank  God,  we  are  not.    But,  this  does  not  re- 

auire  us  to  throw  away  our  faith,    it  would  be  too  long  to  notice  all 
le  gentleman  says.    I  attend  to  the  most  important. 
Now,  I  will  venture  to  assert,  that  there  is  not  a  Protestant  in  this 
house,  who  can  say,  that  he  has  found  out  all  the  tenete  which  he  be- 


on 


MotWi  hf  vradiof  Hm  Wk  •lone.    Ho  Mlefw  tliMa,  beeiiM  Mt 


or  a  luMdiitf  oHmt  iniaeneoo  may  have  been  broaglit  to  bear  wpm  hia 
■lad  and  his  affeetioiia,  favorable  to  tlioae  peenliar  tenela.  It  is  not  at 
■i  iw eaae  witli  Proleotaat  ohiMrea,  aay  laofa  tbaa  witb  Catkolk  ehil- 
tfien,  that  leamm  h  Ibe/nl  to  lead  tbem  to  tbefrMief.  Let  eaeh  one 
eaiMiidlj  examine  bis  own  beart,  and  aak  bteaelf  if  be  waa  not  aa 
nMMb  tdmmhi  in  those  doetrinea  wbieb  be  now  profinaeaf  as  the  Catii* 

^pwBW^B   ^waPiuP'  KilMi  VWMBMUJi'npe 

How  ean  he  be  sore,  if  he  indeed  poeaeas  aa  antbentie  copy  of  the 
acfiptorea,  that  be  midmlmii  theni  I    •«  The  word  of  God,*^sav«  the 

Pnleataal  biahop,  Walton,  **  does  not  eonstit  in  mere  letters,  whether 
wiilten  or  iirinted,  bot  in  the  aeme  of  it;  which  no  one  can  better  b- 
lerpet  than  the  true  ebmoh,  to  whieh  Christ  eoniniitted  this  aania 
fm^BJ*  (Polyglot  Prolef.  eh.  ▼.) 

My  opponent  saya.  thaie  was  a  oopj  of  the  seriptnrea  Ibond,  wbieb 
the  iipen  of  a  monk  had  never  aoUed,  And  how  does  he  go  about  to 
•itabliak  tbia  nropoaitioa  I  He  quoted  Home.  I  will  take  up  thia 
vaiy  work,  and  prova,  while  I  admit  that  Home  waa  a  learned  writer, 
that  be  fell  into  aome  very  unlearned  blunders.  But  bow  does  Home 
aay  that  my  friend  is  right  ?  He  says,  that  this  very  manuscript  waa 
'  i  in  one  of  the  twenty-two  monasteries  of  Mount  Athos ! !  Lo ! 
waa  a  monk  at  the  bottom  of  it  after  all !   [Time  eipiied.] 


aia«'  (jjtMvaBiiL 


Mm  o^tkdkf  F.  M 


1  JF^i^?^  'kcre  is  any  thing  but  order  in  our  discussion— I  mean 
lofieu  mder,  as  respects  the  duties  of  a  respondent.  Now,  eertain- 
VijW«  ^M  abundantly  appear  in  the  report  of  this  debate. 

Tm  genlleoian  has  not  onoe^  as  yet,  replied  to  my  apeecbea  in  reffu« 
iar  aeiiuence ;  but,  afkr  the  interval  of  a  night,  a  day,  and  sometunea 
two  days,  he  responds  to  some  point  or  argument :  and  then  bis  r^ 
plv  consists  either  in  accusing  me  of  misunderstanding,  or  misstating 
what  he  has  aaid ;  or  perhaps  in  denying  my  authorities,  or  by  intro- 
dneiuf  some  extract,  or  tradition,  or  opinion,  from  some  great  Pro- 
jMtant,  or  some  good  Catholic,  or  some  excogitaaon  of  his  own. 
His  last  speech  was  a  happy  illustraaon  of  Ovid'a 

**  coiif««tW}iie  •bdeiu— 
If  on  bene  janctanmi  ditcordia  Mmiiia  rerain.*' 

Mm  «  «      m  •  [MetiBior.  lib«  I. 

AM,  oertainl^,  bia  mirtiifiilneaa  and  gnvity  were  in  unison  witl- 
Iha  dignity  of  bis  reply ;  and  equally  fallible  aa  respects  effect  of  any 
amrt  upon  his  audience.  This  rhetoric  soon  weara  out.  It  is  but  an 
M%aiio«nd,  a  shadow;  the  criala  calls  fbraomething  more  solid.  But 
if  it  etinot  be  found,  I  must  aubmit  to  interraption,  and  torn  aaide  to 
moAm  tha  gleaninga  of  hk  last  and  best  reiecttons  upon  the  prophecies. 

The  gentleman  baa  given  ua  from  bia  library  some  ridiculone  puns 
spell  the  name  of  IMlmMt.  He  doea  not,  and  under  his  haid  desti- 
ny he  cannot,  alwaya  discriminate  the  preeiae  point  in  debate.  It  is 
not  about  tihe  name  of  an  individual,  such  aa  Ludovicua,  or  Maho- 
met; butof  a  ^ple— a  community—*  kingdom.  Hia  second  mia- 
Ma  18»  that  if  it  were  a  personal  name,  the  number  of  tlie  name  of 
Maboiiiet  as  given  in  his  example  only  makes  508.  His  name  pro- 
perly wntten  is  equal  to  only  463.    He  ought  also  to  have  decipfaeiv 


ftOMAM  CATHOMC   MSLlGlOft, 


265 


edt.or  his  author,  whether  bis  name  should  be  taken  as  it  is  written 
in  Arabic  or  in  Greek.  But  whether  he  take  it  in  Arabic  or  in  Greek, 
it  will  not  in  Grecian  numerals,  and  certainly  not  in  Arabic,  equal 
666.  So  fails  his  effort  at  both  reason  and  ridicule  to  dispose  of  this 
moraing^i  argument  from  prophecy.  I  again  repeat,  that  on  thia  point, 
aa  on  every  other,  my  arorument  appears  unassailable. 

Yesterday  my  opponent  wjjs  asked,  where  infallibility  resided ;  to- 
day he  answers  by  asking,  where  shall  we  find  the  mind  ?  In  the 
head,  stomach,  hands,  feet,  or  where  \  This  is  not  a  parallel  case. 
The  question  is,  as  usual,  mistaken,  or  misapplied.  It  is,  wheie  is 
the  moulk  of  infallibility !  when  I  desire  an  infallible  response,  where 
shall  I  hear  it  t  Where  is  the  Umgw  of  infallibility  1  If  the  church 
possess  infallibility  and  never  decides  a  question  by  any  organ — ne- 
ver can  utter  an  answer,  it  is  worth  no  more  than  a  diamond  in  the 
depths  of  the  Atlantic. 

l*he  alpha  and  omega  of  the  proofs  offered  by  the  bishop  for  the  ex 
istence  of  infallibility,  which  has  been  so  often  repeated,  and  which 
I  promised  sometime  to  notice,  is  this :  "  /aot  vjilh  you^  Now,  lo- 
gic asks,  what  means  "  I  am  with  you  !*'  as  proving  infallibility,  un- 
less **  I  am  with  you,"  is  a  phrase  already  incontrovertibly  established 
to  mean  infallibility.  But  what  says  bible  fact  T  There  are,  at  least,  four 
meanings  of  the  phrase.  I  am  with  you,  personally,  providentially,  gra- 
ciously, or  with  miraculous  power.  It  could  not  be  the  first :  for  he 
was  leaving  them  personally.  It  ceuld  not  be  the  second ;  because 
that  was  common  to  all  good  men.  Thus  God  was  with  Joseph,  with 
Jacob,  with  all  the  patriarchs,  and  with  all  good  men.  It  could  not 
be  that  God  was  to  be  with  them  graciously ;  for  that  too,  is  common 
to  all  christians.  As  the  apostles  said  to  all  good  christians, "  The  Lord 
be  with  you  all,*'  it  could  not  be  a  special  promise  to  the  apostles. 
What  remains  then  1  Mark,  the  evangelist,  explains  :  "  These  signs 
shall  follow.  In  my  name  shall  they  cast  out  devils:  they  shall 
speak  with  new  tongues,  serpents  shall  they  take  away ;  and  if  they 
drink  any  deadly  thing  it  shall  not  hurt  them.  They  shall  impose 
hands  on  the  sick  and  they  shall  be  whole."  So  the  Rhemish  Testa- 
ment reads  Mark's  account  of  the  promise,  "  I  am  with  you."  Again ; 
after  the  ascension  of  the  Messiah,  the  evangelist  relates,  v.  20.  "  But 
they "  (the  apostles)  »*  going  forth  preached  every  where :  our  Lord 
working  with  all^  and  confirming  the  word  with  signs  that  followed." 

This,  then,  is  the  proof  of  infallibilinr,  as  interpreted  by  Mark  in 
the  canon  Catholic  'mtament  Now,  does  not  this  confine  the  pro- 
mise to  the  apostles  1  Can  the  popes  work  miracles  1  Can  the  bish- 
ops t— Such  a  miracle,  forsooth,  as  the  existence  of  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic church  in  the  western  empire,  after  the  rise  of  Mahometanism 
in  the  east !  A  splendid  miracle,  truly !  That  proves  as  much  for 
Mahometanism  and  Paganism,  as  for  the  popes  of  Rome :  for  all 
these  systems  rose  upon  the  ruin,  and  also  withstood  the  shocks  of 
other  systems! 

When  Peter  said  to  the  cripple,  "  Silver  and  gold  I  have  none;  but 
fticA  tu  I  have  I  give  thee— In  the  name  of  Jesus  take  up  your  bed  and 
walk,"  he  felt  that  he  possessed  something  in  the  promise  ^*- 1  am 
•  widi  you."  Can  any  of  his  successors  speak  in  this  stvle :  silver 
and  gold  I  have  none :  but  such  as  I  have  (the  power  of  Christ)  I 
give  thee  I 

The   gentleman's  dissertation  on  the  vicious  circle,  leaves  him 
X  34      - 


hbbats  on  tbi 

wlian  it  found  him ;  belieying  the  church  firftt  and  the  bible  after- 
Vifds;  and  making  the  one  prove  the  other:  but  he  will  never  dis 
fom  of  it  He  is  like  the  eccentric  witness,  whose  veracity  could 
only  be  |)roved  by  the  principal :  and  yet  the  principal  depends  foi 
bis  veracity  upon  the  witness.  The  bishop  for  a  little  while  turned 
Protestant,  and  then  be  affirmed  that  he  believed  in  Christ  on  the  ev- 
idence of  his  own  miracles ;  and  that  evidence  he  found  in  the  bible, 
ind  thai  bible  he  interpreted  for  himself.  Thus  he  became  a  Protest* 
ant,  ivlita  he  attempted  to  solve  that  Gordion  knot.  But  as  soon  as 
he  had,  by  the  Protestant  rule,  obtained  faith  in  Christ,  he  instantly 
relapsed  into  the  embrace  of  holy  mother,  and  denounced  the  bridge 
over  which  he  escaped  from  the  island.  * 

But  the  gentleman  asked  a  question  which  has  puzzled  wise  men  to 
snswer.  A  chil^  however  of  four  years  old  could  have  asked  Newton 
a  question  that  he  could  not  have  answered  in  a  thousand  years. 
^How  cat  you  prove  the  bible  f*  says  the  bishop.  Does  it  prove 
itself!  I  w  Jl  imiute  him,  this  once,  and  ask,  does  nature  prove  ii* 
self  I  Does  God  prove  his  own  ezistence  without  his  works  or  by 
Us  works?  Must  there  be  another  universe  created  to  prove  this  T-— 
Tbis  is  a  question  no  one  will  put,  unless  on  the  hypothesis  that  no 
am  can  prove  a  universe  to  exist  but  by  other  tesumony  than  itself. 
So  the  bible  proves  itself  to  be  the  word  of  God,  as  nature  proves  it* 
wlf  to  be  the  work  of  God.  Thus  has  the  supreme  intelligence  stamp* 
ed  the  impress  of  himself  both  on  nature  and  revelation.  David  says, 
**  Lord,  thou  h^st  magnified  thy  word  above  all  thy  name.**  I  have 
other  reasons,  if  necessary,  to  prove  how  the  bible  was  put  together. 
Many  a  christian  has  been  made  so  by  the  single  testimony  of  one 
evanfelist ;  or  by  a  single  epistle  of  Paul.  We  have  four  gospels; 
but  one  would  have  been  enough ;  and  as  much  as  many  tndividiials 
had.  The  whole  christian  doctrine  might  he  learned  from  Paul  alone, 
ffon  perliaps  the  half  of  his  epistles.  Paul  and  Peter  wrote,  and  said 
mttk  iioio  by  divine  inspiration  than  is  preserved  or  recoided.  So 
did  theaneient  prophets.  We  need  not  to  prove,  in  order  to  our  faith, 
who  collected  the  writings  into  one  volume,  any  more,  than  who  col- 
lected all  the  words  of  Christ,  that  are  reported. 

Cardinal  Belfarmine  says:  **  There  is  sure  to  be  some  doctor  at 
the  bead  of  a  schism.'*  Heiesiarchs  are  generally  men  of  letters. 
Where  then  the  pertinency  of  those  remarks  about  the  unlearned  wres- 
ting the  scriptures?  The  original  means  unimuMkl^  uniraetable  persons 
rather  than  unlearned.  Philosophers,  as  they  love  to  be  called,  are 
generally  the  most  unteachable,  and  the  greatest  wresters  and  perver* 
ters  of  the  scriptures.  Peter  had  those  too  wise  to  learn,  in  his  eye, 
when  be  spoke  of  wresting  the  scripture ;  and  not  the  simple,  honest 
and  unassuming  laity.  Let  a  man  sit  down  as  Mary  sat,  at  the  feet  of 
Christ,  and  bumble  himself  as  a  pupil  ought ;  he  will  then  hear  the 
vilee  of  God,  and  understand  it  too.  He  will  then  discern  how  it  is, 
that  all  God*8  children  are  taught  by  God,  and  that  there  is  none  that 
taisheth  like  him. 

Mather  wittily  than  loffieally,  the  gentleman  gives  the  monks  some 
evedit,  for  handling  the  Alexandrine  manuscript.     Be  it  known  howev 
«r,  that  monkery  began  in  St.  Anthony's  time;  and  that  this  said  copy 
is  older  than  the  founder  of  monasteries.    Because  Tacitus,  Livy,  Hor 

,  and  Virgil  passed  through  their  hands,  are  we  dependent  on  tUt^a, 


BOMAN    CATUOUC    RXLIGION. 


887 


Ibr  ill  our  knowledge  of  Greek  and  RoiaaD  letters?  The  monks  handled 
copies  that  they  never  wrote.  But  that  gave  those  copies  neither 
more  nor  less  credit.  I  did  not  mean  that  one  ought  not  to  thumb  the 
scriptures  in  reading  them,  when  I  spoke  of  them  being  soiled  by  the 
hands  of  amonk.  I  have  then,  so  faras  objection  has  been  made,  as  1  con- 
conceive,  sustained  the  sixth  proposition.  Will  the  president  moderator 
please  have  the  6th  proposition  read?  [The  5th  prop,  was  here  read.) 
Prop.  V.  Her  notiontof  purgatory,  indulgences,  auricular  coDfeMion.  remit* 
•ion  of  sins,  transubstantiation,  superero^lion,  Ate.  essential  elements  of  oer  sys- 
tem, are  immoral  in  their  tendency,  and  injurious  to  the  well-being  of  society, 
religious  and  political. 

Now,  my  friends,  I  want  to  strike  a  blow  at  the  main  root  of  the 
whole  papal  superstition  :  for  that  root  is  found  in  the  proposition  just 
now  read.  I  have  but  little  time  to  do  it,  and  shall,  therefore,  march 
right  up  to  the  point  at  once. 

The  capital,  distinguishing  doctrine  of  Protestantism,  next  to  the 
bible  alone  as  the  rule  and  measure  of  christian  faith  and  manners, 
and  the  right  and  duty  of  all  to  read  and  examine  it  is,  that  the  death  of 
Jesus  Christ  was  not  simply  that  of  a  martyr :  hut  that  "  be  died  fur 
our  mm,  according  to  the  scriptures."  Thai  the  death  or  sacrifice  of 
Ckritt  i»  the  great  tin  offerings  and  the  only  sin  offerings  iB  a  cardinal 
doctrine  of  Protestantism ;  and  that  there  is  now  no  priest,  uor  vic- 
tim, nor  sacrifice,  nor  altar,  nor  sin  offering  on  earth  follows,  as  a 
matter  of  course.  Jesus  was  "  the  Lamb  of  God" — "  Himself  the  sin 
offering  and  the  priest."  He  expiated  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on  the  . 
cross.'*  "  His  blood  cleanses  from  all  sin."  Papal  priests,  penances, 
confessions,  masses,  remissions,  purgatories,  intercessions  of  saints, 
angelb,  and  almost  all  their  ceremonies,  arise  from  the  notion,  the 
radical  mistake  that  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  as  a  sin  offering,  an  atone- 
ment, a  reconciliaiiov  was  some  way  deficient.  Although  we  can 
trace  supererogdUuu,  purgatory,  penances,  lustrations,  the  intercessions 
of  nngels  and  dead  men,  &c.  to  the  philosophers  and  dreamers  of  the 
east— their  divine  Platos,  Pythagorases  and  Aristotles  :  still  the  im- 
mediate origin  and  cause  of  all  these  errors  may  be  traced  to  ignorance 
of  the  bible  doctrine  of  the  priesthood  of  Christ,  the  antitype  of  that  of 
Aaron  and  Melchisidec.  It  was  Dryden,  a  Roman  Catholic  poet,  if  I 
mistake  not,  who  said  that  the  dos  pou  sto,  which  Archimedes  sought 
in  vain  by  which  to  raise  the  globe,  was  found  by  the  popes  of  Rome 
in  the  doctrine  of  purgatory.  That  was  the  philosopher's  stone — the 
lever  which  lifU  the  world — which  has  brought  more  gold  to  Rome, 
than  the  discovery  of  America  itself. 

My  friends,  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  with  all  its  correlates  is  bared 
on  two  errors. 

tst.  T%at  man  can  do  more  than  Ms  duty  t 

dd.  Thai  sotnething  may  be  added  to  the  saerijtee  of  Christ  to  give  ii 
wwre  value  or  efficacy. 

Now,  I  aflirm,  that  no  created  being,  not  a  Gabriel,  or  Uriel,  or  Raph* 
ael,  or  the  highest  of  the  angelic  hosts,  can  do  an  act  of  superero- 
gation. No  man  can,  by  any  thought,  word,  or  action,  make  God  his 
debtor.  ^  Who,*'  says  Paul,  **  has  first  given  to  the  Lord,  and  it  shall 
be  recompensed  to  him  again?  For,  of  him,  and  through  him,  and  to 
him,  are  all  things."  Jesus  told  his  disciples,  that  when  they  had 
done  all  that  was  commanded  them,  they  had  inly  done  *heir  duty, 
and  were   to  him  unprofitable   servants.     T.ie  greatest   naiht  that 


DXAATI  021   TIIE 

liftl  it  not  more  holy  than  he  ought  to  ho,  w  hit  own  account 
Thistinfle  thonriit  evtpontm  thataea  of  merit  which  has  pcrfonncd 
■oeh  woDdera  in  Roman  story. 

Mo  human  bcinf  has  an^  thinr  to  gfive  to  God ;  and  therefore  none 
flu  merit  from  him  any  thing.  If  a  matins  salvation  depended  on  his 
•hoiiing  a  single  tear,  where  could  he  find  it !  The  heart  that  feels 
and  the  tear  that  ilows^clear  as  chrystal  down  the  cheek  of  the  most 
devoted  saint^  are  of  God's  creation.  And,  therefore,  it  is  out  of  the 
fieation,  to  conceive  how  any  work  of , merit,  as  respects  God,  is  po9» 
■lUe  for  angel  or  for  man. 

Were  a  saint  to  turn  pilgrim  and  peregrinate  on  liis  naked  kneea 
the  four  quarters  of  the  globe,  were  he  to  give  his  body  to  the  flames, 
when  God  asks  it,  or  duty  lequires  it;  he  has  deserved  nothing  from 
God,  on  the  ground  of  merit  He  has  only  employed  the  powers  that 
God  gnve  him,  and  used  his  faculties  in  a  way  consonant  to  the  de- 
■•f*  ^  ^i«  that  gave  them.  And  sooner  will  a  man  add  new  glo- 
mes to  the  sun  or  create  new  luminaries  in  the  heavens,  than  add  one 
attribute  of  merit  or  of  power  to  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  "  He  fin- 
ished transgression :  made  an  end  of  sin  offerings,  brought  in  an  ever- 
Itetinf  justification;'*  and  left  nothing  to  be  done  to  make  his  sacri- 
iee  more  meritorious  or  efficient. 

Works  of  supererogation,  auricular  confession,  masses  for  sins, 
transubstantiation,  prgatory,  with  all  the  appurtenances  thereto  he- 
lonffing,  are  the  veriest  ghosts  of  paganism— the  phantoms  of  infatu- 
iled  lenson,  attempts  against  the  dimity  of  God  and  the  supremacy, 
■■  well  as  the  true  and  proper  divinity  and  dignity  of  his  Son. 

This  superstition,  this  man  of  sin,  stands  with  his  two  feet  upon 
lie  ^o'greatait  lies  in  human  history.  He  places  his  right  foot  on 
IM  first  and  his  left  foot  on  the  second.  Need  I  say  that  the  former 
lilrms  ikai  the  ioerijtee  ef  God*§  oum  Son  m  i  fS0t(^Sd|ti/  m  a  $in  tger* 
img  t  and  that  the  latter  teaches  that  man  eon  do  more  than  Am  duty  to 
M.  Here  then,  I  say  to  mv  opponent,  I  will  measure  swords  with 
him.  Let  him  meet  me  on  these  too  points,  then  it  will  be  an  easy 
****^  ^  *^*!E**®®  °^  **^®  imaginary  purgatories,  transubstantiation,  pen- 
ances, works  of  supererogation,  &c.  &c.  and  to  shew  that  so  lar  from 
bringing  glory  to  God  or  righteousness  to  men,  they  are  positively, 
nalnimlly,  and  necessarily  opposed  to  both.  Let  him  try  his  strength 
oT^Mriptural  argument  and  reason  on  these  cardinal  points,  and  it 
-rill,  ■•  onr  time  is  so  fer  exhausted,  save  the  tediouanesa  of  nume- 
—  delaila.^[Time  expired.] 


BO^rAN   CATHOLIC    SBLI6I0N. 


269 


_  Oaffmi  4  o'tbdkt  P*  M 

My  friends,  it  is  imperative  upon  me  to  make  one  expodtion  hefoiw 
1  pioeoed.  if  any  of  you  were  here  when  my  friend  would  have  led 
you  mto  a  gross  mistake,  respecting  the  Catholic  church,  by  quoting 
a  prelended  extinct  from  Liguori.  I  asserted  then,  that  noUiiag  could 
be  found  m  that  writer's  works  to  substantiate  the  odious  charge,  to 
flTO  It  io  much  as  a  semblance  of  truth.  I  have  now  before  me  Oio 
•Blire  works  of  Liguori,  and  I  have  placed  them  in  tiie  presence  of 
my  friend,  Mr.  Campbell.  The  SOi  volume  has  an  index,  containing 
•¥eiy  word  of  any  importance,  and  I  repeat,  tiiataftera  search  throuirh 
r"J'*T*  "i°f  Toliuiie«f  miking  Uke  ike  qmiaiiom  W"  lad  memns  can 
mfimA    I  have  now  placed  tiie  book  in  the  hands  of  Pro^ssor 


Biggs,  of  Lane  seminary,  one  of  the  moderatore,  and  t  Proleatant  of 
the  Presbyterian  denommation,  if  I  do  not  mistake,  and  I  will  leavn 
it  to  him,  or  an^f  other  intelligent  and  candid  man,  to  say  to  yon 
whether  the  fact  is  as  my  friend  has  stated,  or  the  very  contrary  of 
what  he  has  stated. 

Mr.  Campbell.    Be  so  good  as  to  explain  the  matter  folly. 

BisBOP  PuRCELL.  I  will  explain  the  exact  stale  of  the  case.  Mr. 
Smith,  the  author  of  the  translation,  from  whom  my  friend  read  this, 
as  well  as  many  other  things,  km  given  a  fabe  quotation,  and  mado 
Liguori  say,  what  he  never  said,  "nie  facts  are  these :  a  canon  of  tho 
council  of  TVent,  and  Liguori,  according  to  the  canon,  say,  ^*  that  if 
a  priest  falls  by  criminal  intercourse,  as  specified,  firom  the  holy 
state  of  purity,  to  which  he  is  bound  by  a  voluntary,  deliberate,  and 
solemn  vow,  he  shall  be  deprived  of  a  large  portion  of  his  salary  for 
the  first  offence.  If  he  does  not  refrain  after  admonition  and  such 
punishment,  he  is  again  admonished,  and  deprived  of  his  whole  salary, 
and  suspended  from  all  his  functions  as  a  priest  in  the  Catholic  chureh« 
But  afler  Uie  third  admonition,  if  he  is  still  incorrigible,  he  is  excom* 
municated,  and  cut  off  from  the  church,  even  as  St.  Paul  cut  off  the 
incestuous  man  of  Corinth."  1st.  £p.  Corinth,  ch.  5.  v.  5.  Nowhere, 
in  any  part  of  these  volumes,  is  it  said  that  a  priest  may  sin  thus  upon 
paving  a  fine,  &c. 

Thus,  my  friends,  you  see  how  the  poisonous  fountains  of  error  and 
prejudice  have  been  swelling  over  the  land,  and  infecting  the  public 
mind,  until  many  an  honest  and  upright  man  has  thought,  when  he 
denounced  us  for  our  (imputed)  doctrines,  he  was  doing  God  a  service. 
Were  he  aware  of  the  imposition  practised  on  his  credulity,  he  would, 
I  have  no  doubt,  have  turned  his  indignation  on  more  deserving  victims. 
**  ijr  t^«  leave  off  $landering  tkem^^*  said  the  ministera  of  Amsterdan^ 
to  vossius,  who  remonstrated  with  them  on  their  injustice  to  the  Ca* 
tholics,  "  our  people  will  soon  leave  m."  *'  We  shall  do  no  good  wiik  ike 
people,^  said  Shaflesbury,  speaking  of  the  Mocedo  plot,  **ifw€eannoi 
make  them  swallow  greater  nonsense  than  /Am."  **  Thou  shall  not  bearfalM 
witness  agmnsi  thy  neighbory'*^  is  a  commandment  which  Maria  Monk 
and  her  reverend  protectors  reckon  not  to  belong  to  the  **  weightier 
things  of  the  law."  Their  stale  calumnies  are  paid  for  with  the  blood- 
money  !  Our  doctrine,  many  of  its  ministerial  adversaries  know  to  be 
p*ire  and  holy;  but,  overwhelmed  with  confusion,  whenever  they  at- 
tempt argument,  they  have  no  resource  but  in  addressing  themselves 
to  the  prejudices  of  their  implicit  believera.  These  mock  at  Catholics 
for  **heanng  the  church ;"  and  whom  do  tkey  hear  1 

As  to  the  bible,  the  whole  difficulty  is  to  be  gone  over  again  and 
again.  Every  new  translation,  it  seems,  lies  open  to  objections  on 
grave  and  important  grounds.  I  have  here  a  paper,  printed  at  Kana- 
wha, in  Cabell  county,  Virginia.  In  it  a  coosiaerable  class  of  Bap* 
tiets,  I  think  they  are,  quarrel  with  their  brethren  near  Zoar,  in  Ohio, 
and  quarrel  with  the  bible.  They  insist  that  all  the  existing  iranskf 
Horn  of  it  should  be  rejected,  and  a  new  one  commenced  tor  them- 
selves from  the  original  Hebrew  and  Greek  scriptures — if  they  get 
them  ^  They  can  never  get  a  bible  they  are  sure  of.  They  cannot  get 
the  original  Hebrew  in  which  the  gospel  of  St.  Matthew  was  written. 
St.  Jerome  says  he  had  seen  it,  and  that  is  all  we  know  of  it  since, 
lliey  cannot  in  twelve  months  of  the  time  that  the  getting  up  of  their 
bible  will  require,  determine,  on  grounds  satisfactory  to  a  biblical 


i 


170  VIBATX.  ON   THE 

«ritle«  wad  on  Piotetttnt  prinoiplet,  whj  HioY  adofit  or  iftjeet,  tt  Hm 
•f  Ml  iitv  bo,  the  Mvtitli  ▼orao,  of  llio  ftllli  ekaptor,  of  the  let  Epistle 

of  St.  Join. 

Wiilo  tliit  ptper  wis  being  printed  at  Charleston,  Virginia,  the 
••  Churchman,"  at  New  York,  perhaps  at  the  same  hour,  was  printinflr 
the  very  proof  1  have  read  to  you,  in  favor  of  the  Catholic  doctrine  of 
eonfeaaioii.  Let  the  Burmese  and  all  others.  Pagans  or  Christians, 
He  on  their  oars,  till  the  new  scriptures  appear.  Then  let  printers, 
■fWts  and  missionaries*  be  well  paid,  and  the  enmbrous  machinery 
■et  to  work,  and  conipm  heaven  and  earth  to  make  one  proselyte, 
who  sorely  eannot  be  more  settled  in  his  faith  than  they  who  thus  do 
•|iise  the  **  inspired,  authoritative,  perpetual,  catholic,  perfect  and  in 
'Mligible  rule.** 

Me  says  the  doeuments  I  have  read  are  not  pertinent  Now  he  eer- 
lainly  did  not  suspect  that  I  thought  A«  would  so  consider  them.  In  his 
tstiinalion,  there  ts  nothing  pertinent,  lo^cal,  relevant,  in  all  this  dis- 
cission^ bnl  what  he  says  himself.  This  he  has  neglected  no  oppor- 
Imity  of  impressing  on  our  attention.  But  the  public  will  be  the  best 
judge,  and  they  can  see  through  the  attempts  of  either  disputant  to 
idiestall  their  impartial  and  unbiassed  verdict.  The  printed  report  of 
itis  controversy,  will  shew  the  pertinency  or  impertinency  of  our  re- 
spective argruments,  and,  for  my  own  part,  I  have  not  the  slightest  feai 
01  the  result. 

1  am  very  far  from  believing  that  I  am  worthy  of  advocating  the 
holy  cause,  in  which  my  humble  talents,  and  all  my  heart*s  affections 
an  enlisted,  but  such  is  my  confidence  in  the  power  of  that  truth, 
which  I  embraced  on  conviction  as  soon  as  I  was  able  to  judge  for 
myself,  and  whose  evidences  have  been,  ever  since,  brightening  to  my 
miMlefstanding,  the  more  I  examine  them,  that  I  ask  no  more  than  that 
WKJ  unadorned  arguments  should  fall  into  the  hands  of  thinking  men. 

My  oppaient  says  that  the  whole  structure  of  Catholicism  is  an  as- 
Mranflion,  and  rests  upon  two  liet.  The  gentleman  pledcred  liimself  at 
iM  oomiicnceiiient  of  this  debate,  to  use  no  opprobnoos language,  and 
I  pfomised  not  to  set  him  the  eiamole.  How  he  has  kept  his  word, 
■s  the  terms  in  which  his  propositions  are  expressed  are  so  very  re- 
ined, let  these,  by  which  they  aie  defended,  decide.  I  will  not  bandy 
epithets  with  him,  but  I  must  say  that  the  Catholic  church  has  two 
■onnd  legs  to  stand  upon.  The  gentleman  tedders  her  crutches  which 
tie  modestly  declines,  with  the  suggestion  that  as  his  argument  is 
lame  he  wmj  have  occasion  for  them  himself!  I  will  argue  these  va- 
rious doctrines  which  he  has  enumerated  and  prove  them  all  to  be 
•niiided  in  the  bible,  and  believed,  in  all  past  ages,  from  the  time  of 
Chrlal  and  his  apostles.  The  gentleman  has  misrepresented,  or  he 
does  not  understand  our  doetrine.  We  believe  that  there  is  no  other 
name  under  heaven,  but  the  name  of  Jesus  given  to  men,  whereby 
they  may  be  saved.  Acts  tv.  19.  We  believe  that  ^by  me  oblation 
Gmd  hath  perfected  fur  ever  them  thai  are  mnctifitd^^  Heb.  z.  14. 
fhat  atonement  by  His  vicarious  sacrifice,  if  not  the  first,  is  one  of  the 
grsat  cardinal  doctrines  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  no  man  who 
pretends  to  any  ac<|uaintance  with  that  doctrine,  will,  or  can  venture 
to  deny.  Christ  has  paid  an  all-sufficient  price  for  our  ransom.  But 
do  we  arraign  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  of  insufficiency,  when  we  san&' 
lil^  the  Sahlath,  when  we  give  ahns  to  the  poor,  when  we  abstain  from 


B09IAN   CATHOUC    RELIGION. 


271 


evil,  when  we  hear  preaching,  or  go  to  prayer  1  When  St.  Paul  chas- 
tis'H)  his  body  and  brought  it  under  subjection,  lest,  wh,ie  he  prwiched 
to  others  he  should  himself  become  a  reprobate,  did  he  believe  Chnst  s 
sacrifice  incomplete  1  that  it  needed  his  supplementary  austerities? 
Or  that  the  other  Apostles  should  command  us,  to  make  sure  mr  election 
and  vocation  by  good  works ;  to  work  out  our  salvation  with  fear  and 
trembling!  No;  God  who  made  us  withoutourselves,  will  not  save  us 
without  ourselves.     He  requires  our  co-operation,  and  with  his  grace 
he  aids  our  weak  endeavor.  This  grace  he  communicates  to  us  by  divers 
channels,  and  in  various  ways.  Of  these  the  principal  are  the  seven  sa 
eraments,  which,  if  I  may  use  the  gentleman's  figure  in  its  proper  appli 
cation,  like  the  seven  mouths  of  the  Nile  convey  the  healing  waters  from 
the  fountains  of  the  Savior  to  every  portion  of  the  church.    The  will 
is  made  and  recorded.    The  executors,  the  apostles  and  pnests  of  the 
church,  convey  and  apply  an  adequate  portion  to  the  wants  of  men. 
Wherever  a  captive  may  be  presumed  to  groan  in  spiritual  slavery, 
they  seek  him  out,  they  proclaim  to  him  the  glad  tidings  of  his  deliv 
erance,  they  pay,  with  the  treasures  of  Chris^  of  which  they  are  thi 
depoeitaries,  the  price  of  his  ransom ;  and  this  when  they  find  the  slave 
willing  to  accept  the  terms  on  which  redemption  is  offered,  do  they 
carry  uito  eflfect,  in  his  behalf,  the  charitable  intentions  of  the  divme 
testator.    Is  this  arraigning  his  bounty,  or  distributing  it  as  he  com- 
manded ?     Is  this  robbing  Christ  of  his  glory,  or  calling  all  nations  to 
bask  in  its  rays  and  exult  in  ite  effulgence  ?    The  Catholic  church,  in 
all  the  institutions  she  venerates,  the  sacraments  she  administers,  the 
truths  she  proclaims,  the  sacrifices  she  offers,  the  prayers  she  prefers, 
the  charity  she  inculcates,  the  grace  she  dispenses,  acts  by  the  com- 
mand of  Christ,  in  the  name  of  Christ.  This  t*  the  true  and  hmngway 
by  which  she  commands  all  to  seek  access  to  the  Father,  and  by  Him, 
with  Him,  and  in  Him,  to  give  to  God  all  honor  and  glory  forever. 
He  is  the  sun  of  the  entire  system,  and  all  the  ordinances  of  religion, 
are  but  the  rays  of  that  sun  enlightening  and  vivifying  the  chtisiian 
pilgrim  at  every  step  of  his  weary  progress  through  this  vale  of  tears. 
Sacrifice,  we  consider  indispensable  to  religion.    It  has  been  offered 
to  God  in  every  age,  by  every  people,  under  every  form  of  religion. 
Abel  offered  sacrifice  in  Eden,  the  purest  firstlings  of  his  flocks,  for  he 
was  a  shepherd.     Cain  sacrificed  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  for  he  was  a 
husbandman.     Noah,  when  the  waters  of  the  deluge  had  subsided, 
Solomon,  when  he  dedicated  the  temple,  offered  sacrifices  ;  even  the 
Pagan  nations  of  the  earth,  who  changed  the  glory  of  the  incorruptible 
G(S,  into  the  likeness  of  the  image  of  corruptible  man,  and  of  birds, 
and  of  four-footed  beasts,  paid  homage  to  this  dictate  of  nature,  and 
continued  the  rite  of  sacrifice,  however  unworthy  the  objects  of  idola- 
try    From  all  this  we  rightly  infer,  that  the  only  perfect  religion 
should  not  be  destitute  of  sacrifice.    The  scripture  everywhere  testt- 
fies  to  its  necessity.    Melchisedec,  as  we  read  in  Genesis,  offerwl 
bread  and  wine.    He  was  a  priest  of  the  most  High  God.    And  Uavid, 
in  the  109th  Psalm,  says  of  Jesus  Christ,  King  of  Justice,  King  of 
Peace,  "The  Lord  hath  sworn,  and  it  shall  not  repent  him,  thou  art  a 
priest  forever  according  to  the  order  of  Melchisedec.       When  Uod 
abrogates  the  Jewish  dispensation,  and  substitutes  a  new  and  better  m 
its  Stead,  he  says  to  the  Jews,  by  the  last  of  all  the  prophets,  "  I  have 
no  jdeamrcin  you,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts  i  and  I  will  not  receive  a  gifl 


tij 


*IU 


DttATB  on  TUB' 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


273 


ff  fiur  kmd  i  for /mm  the  fuing  efikemn  even  to  tke  going  dmim,  m$ 
mmm  m  gmd  among  ike  OenHlee^  and  in  every  place  t&re  is  a  taerijke^ 
md  there  i§  cffered  to  my  name  a  clean  oblation  t  for  my  name  ie  great 
wmmg  the  Geniildf  eailh  the  Lord  of  Aot^t.**  Malachias,  eh.  11,  (&.  v. 
Wlien  Jesiis  Christ,  as  we  read  in  three  £vaiifr?lists,  institoled  the 
Blessed  Eucharist,  he  said  to  his  afioetles,  «*  TMe  my  hodv^  wkkh  i» 
iferedfor  you,  Thie  m  nif  Mood,  whiek  i§  Aedfor  you.  DotkiMin  com' 
wt^noraiton  of  me. 

Catholics  obey  the  injunctioiis  of  the  Sarior,  they  do  wlial  he  eoni- 
maiuled  them,  they  oier  tk»  mmnorial  sacrifice,  they  continue  and  re- 
preseat  the  sacrifice  of  Jesus  Christ  upon  Calvary.  They  offer  it 
under  the  forms  of  bread  and  wine  as  Melchisedec  had  done  in  fi^re. 
They  offer  it  from  the  rising  of  the  sun  to  the  ^oingr  down  thereof, 
as  Malachy  had  predicted.  On  Asians  distant  plains,  under  the  burn- 
ing sun  of  Africa,  in  the  tangled  forests  of  the  western  worid,  as  well 
as  ia  its  new  and  blooming  cities,  the  sacrifice  is  offered  and  the  pro- 

Chmf  ohtaiis  its  glorious  aceomplishment.  If  Protestants  say  they 
ate  the  saeriice  of  the  death  of  Christ,  I  answer  with  our  divines, 
ao  had  the  servants  of  God,  under  the  law  of  nature  and  the  written 
law;  for  it  is  impossible  that  with  the  blood  of  oxen  and  goats,  sin 
should  be  taken  away ;  nevertheless  they  had  perpetual  sacrifices  to 
represent  the  death  of  Christ,  and  to  apply  the  fruits  of  it  to  their  souls. 
Ia  the  mm  manner  the  Catholics  have  Christ  himself  really  present, 
and  mystically  offered  on  their  altars  daily,  for  the  same  ends. 

If  time  permitted,  I  might  call  up  in  review  before  you  those  vener- 
abie  bishops  and  doctors  whose  blood  sealed  the  doctrine,  which  their 
«fitiii|8  had  defended.  The  saint  Johns  and  the  Polycarps  of  the  east 
ilia  ItenKUses  and  the  Hilaries  of  the  west-^those  venerable  men 
luaa  great  age,  like  that  of  the  patriarchs  of  old,  enabled  them  to 
lE  to  their  children  without  fear  of  error,  or  multiplying  too 
much  the  intermediate  links— the  traditionary  chain  of  their  own  and 
llieir  forelathera*  belief— what  they  believed  and  taught  themselves 
and  what  was  daily  practised  la  thoae  old  centurial  churches 
which  we  have  inhentedfrom  them,  built  many  ages  before  any  of 
the  modern  dissentient  religions  were  known,  and  where  the  altar  and 
the  cross,  the  liturgy  and  die  stone  from  the  wall,  bore  testimony  to 
the  real  presence  In  the  Eucharist,  to  the  divinity  of  the  victim  that 
—  offered  there  In  sacrifice !— [Time  expired.] 


fWDAY,  Jakuaiy  SO.    Majrpmi  9  o'clock,  A.  J£ 

Mb.  CjumDx  riiet— 

I  did  not,  in  first  taking  up  "The  Synopsis  of  the  Moral  Theology 
of  the  Roman  Church,*'  say  aught  of  its  author,  or  of  the  causes  which 
iishepsd  it  into  existence.  But  sinee  it  has  become  a  matter  of  so 
much  debsle,  1  shall  state  a  few  things  concerning  it  and  its  author, 
Mr.  Smith,  the  author,  was  a  member  of  that  community  for  seventeen 
years,  several  of  which  he  ofiiciated  as  a  priest  Convinced  of  the 
errors  of  that  superstition,  he  publiclv  renounced  it,  and  is  now  a  Pro- 
testant minister,  greatly  devoted  to  the  cause  of  Protestantism.   From 


bis  Inamate  acquaintaiice  with  the  apirit  and  tendency  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  institmioo,  he  has  recently  translated  a  considerable  portton 
of  the  works  of  Saint  Ligori.    The  uUe  of  the  book  is  :       ' 

-  A  «jnop.i.  of  the  moral  theology  of  the  church  of  Rome  t"^c'.  from  t^ 
irorkfi  of  St.  Ligori  and  translated  from  the  Latin  into  Lnglish  by  SAMUEL  B. 
Smith,  late  a  popi«h  priest."    New  York,  1836. 

It  is  further  exoiained  in  the  preface :  .•        . 

'  WhaTwe  pre^nt  before  the  onblic  in  thb  .ynopits, »  a  «»X"1r"l»in 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  church  of  kome,  now  taught  »"  «» .  ^;^' '^^^^  ^^^^.^ 
Uf  and  exact  tmnslation  of  selected  porUoos  of  the  volaminous  MoKAL  Th^ 
lIoGV  of  St.  Alphonsus  de  Ligorio,  published  at  Mechlin  m  Belgium.  Jtifcrte- 
fum  ptrmuvh  »n  the  year  1828."    [Preiacc,  p.  5. 

Of  its  author  he  speaks  thus:  j^^i.««  u, 

-  He  was  enrolled  aiJm:ng  the  winff .  «.  the  title  V^^^^^  Tpi/^ffi      '  ^ 
pope  Pin.  VIL  on  the  15tf  of  September,  in  the  year  1816.'      [Pref.  p.  6. 
■^It  seems  that  this  work  is  so  popular,  as  to  be  found  m  almost 
every  priest's  library,  and  is  quoted  by  them,  as  of  ttie  highest  au- 

^*S*de.  the  abo^e  testimony  ill  confirmation  of  the  «"«»'«"*y.  *»(  ^t.  Ligori . 
we  KiTalio  that  of  the  Rev.  feiher  Valera  himself,  the  popish  P"est  of  the  c.^ 
Tf  New  York  This  Rev.  father  Felix  Valera.  about  a  year  and  a  half  ago.  in 
hi.?t?rmpt  at  a  re  u  tat  ion  of  my  "  ,m«nct«rto«  o/p«;,en,."  quotes.  th»  v^r. 
IllmeS^  and  decisive  authority  against  something  which 

he  found  advanced  by  me.'*    [Pref.  P-  9-        .  .  ^.  ^  «^«.;««1  it«plf  • 

In  some  very  important  matters,  he  has  given  the  original  itself, 

and  fearing,  as  the  manner  is,  that  his  translation  might  be  called  m 

'"af^lSiV  denyTai  we  have  given  a  fair  translation,  we  will  then  challejjge 
them  to  c^om:7om;,^  in  a  public  assembly  with  the  -o'^^S^*  f "  ?;f;"'^'*,S; 
we  promise  to  meet  them,  ind  submit  our  translation,  and  the  original,  to  the 
h^TioHf  a  committee,  one  half  of  whom  to  be  ^^t*?*- J>;yj;7;»^*'f*^tiiv: 
oZThalf  by  the  Roman  cler^.  Truth  never  shons  "JJ^.^'^*'^"  „ J  b^ed^tbe 
not  riven  a  fair,  genuine,  andtroe  transhtion,  and  if  we  have  not  ^^^^'^^^^ 
d^t^rlne.  of  Ligo^n  and  the  church  of  Rome  fairly  •"^Jj^JT^  '/'J^'^^^^^^^^  ^^ 
bling.  or  riving  an  erroneous  construction,  we  will  be  wil  ing  to  incur  the  co^ 
"equences^that  we  ought  to  expect,  for  having  deceived  the  pabhc.       Synop. 

^l^£ve 'ffiv«n  ^°^  a  »«"»?!«  ^^^^'^  ^°'^'  *''?^?,^  have  made  numer- 
aus  quotMions  ;  only  one  of  which  has  been  challenged  by  my  ^ntag- 
onist.    That  point  f  touched  as  lightly  as  possible,  because  unsmted 
to  a  popular  issembly.    This  the  gentleman  [""j  »"^^i^^,^»;  /, 
slurr^  it  over,  in  terms  the  least  intelligible  which  I  could  select  at 
the  moment:  but  he  has  no  reason  to  object  even  to  the  eomment,  that 
Mr.  Smith  puts  upon  the  arUcle  quoted.     He  weU  knows  that  mar- 
ria^  in  the*^  priesthood  is  instant  excommunicatton ;  while  poncubin- 
aee  IS  matter  of  forbearance.    In  the  course  of  this  f^^^^^^^\  ^  ^"^ 
oSwsion  to  observe,  that  I  found  very  many  canons  of  the  church  even 
hTThe  fifth  and  sixth  centuries,  on  the  subject  of  inamaKe  and  its 
abuses.    This,  from  the  modesty  of  my  exposition,  he  took  wxMion 
to  use  in  arffuraent,  as  proof  that  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy  was  ear  y 
St?^u^     This  Vas  k  perversion  of  my  observation,  which  the  deli- 
cacy  of  my  situation  would  not  allow  me  to  expkin.    Nor  will  I  now 
sin  against  my  own  feelings,  or  those  of  my  audience,  by  ?;"n^/""7 
into  Sch  details.    I  will  only  add,  that  I  have  a  superfluity  of  evi- 
HceTn  prcK,f  of  the  allegation  of  Ligori     The  casuistry,  dissimula- 
?ron,  andWmorality  of  the  Jesuits,  and  the  «>?^«  g?"^^^^/ V^^^^^^ 
nal  si»irit  of  the  papacv,  are  abundantly  attested  in  the  »*»  ^orksiy- 
SigbSforeme:  "The'Provincial  Letters,"  of  the  accomplished  Pa%- 

18 


I* 


3 
I 


274 


BBBATI'  0!!'  IITB 


i 


•litl,  wljfeli  I  htTii  not  yet  opencid  in  this  ditensaion;  nod,  **Tlit 
»«creto  Monita  of  the  order  of  Jesiw,"  This  copy,  in  the  original 
l!^Z*  \  f "I  '"^*'"n«<*  *>J  ^hc  lady  through  whose  kindness  I  have 
wmm  fiimlslied  with  it,  was  bronght  to  this  country  by  the  secretarv 
of  the  grmt  and  renowned  La  Fayette,  on  his  last  visit  to  the  United 
states.  This,  our  national  benefiMstor,  who,  my  opponent  says,  wan 
a  true  Catholic,  has  declared,  that  if  our  liberty  should  be  lost,  it  will 
of  ^  ^^i?  ^^  priests.  I  saw  this  fact  stated  in  two  papers ;  one 
MilHlied  in  Richmond,  the  other  in  New- York :  and  1  have  no  dnubi 
mm  correctness. 

The  Secreta  Monita  has  Iwen  a  few  years  since,  translated  at  Prin- 
ceton N.  J.  and  is  now  found  in  many  book-stores  in  this  country. 
From  the  penisal  of  these  two  volumes,  we  shall  find  that  the  moral 
lli®olo|ry  of  St.  Ligori,  the  doctrine  of  Smith's  Synopsis,  is  in  per^ 
littimMon  with  the  true  spirit  of  the  Roman  clergy  and  institution 

n*e  genyeman  mentioned  the  disclosures  of  Maria  Monk.  I  did 
not ;  beeauan  I  rely  on  no  sncli  documents.  What  she  says,  is  private 
property ;  and  there  is  no  occasion  for  bringing  it  into  this  contro- 

Z2L  Ilir  "^  **'"*  "P^"^**"  ***'  **  however:  but  need  not  its  aid 

'OU'  III  V  'Owasion. 

The  gMlliman  speaks  oHen  of  the  imperfections  and  difficultiea 
of  Plote^t  translations  of  the  bible.  Me  says  that  we  Protestants 
are  in  a  deploiable  state ;  always  making  new  translations,  and  never, 
or  not  long  satisfied  with  any  of  them :  and  seems  to  sympathize  with 
11%  as  if  w«  wero  without  the  scriptures.  This  pretended  condolence, 

!*!!:![  "SirA?*^"*®/*  ^7*  T.  ■"  opportunity  to  repeat  with  em! 
Masis,  mtaJmekmtk,  wtih  ail  her  pretended  infalUbiHty,  cannot  pro" 
«•€»_«  tmMMom  efanjf  sort,  in  any  living  language  on  earth  '  With 
wl  the  riche%  and  learning,  and  infallibility  of  the  Roman  hierarchy* 
she  owns  not  an  English  New  Testament,  auUieniic  or  authoriaed 
mmm  by  pope  or  council,  or  the  church  diffusive  or  responsive.  How 
■npnuMlf  ridiculous,  therefore,  for  the  gentleman  to  talk  of  Protes- 
tant translations,  as  imperfect !  How  does  he  infallibly  know  that 
any  one  of  them  is  imperfect!  Two  infallible  editions  of  the  Latin 
▼ilgalc  hafo  been  made  by  the  authority  of  two  popes,  not  thirty 
years  distant  from  each  other;  and  yet  they  differ  in  more  than  2000 
places !!!  Sixtus  V.  issued  a  bull,  with  an  anathema,  against  any 
man  that  would  change  his  authorised  vulgate,  even  in  the  least  par- 
ticle, (m  miniina  particola,)  yet,  Clement  VUI.  had  the  audacity. 
In  despne  of  said  hull,  to  order  a  new  translation,  and  did  accomplish 
It,  changing  it  more  tiian  2000  times,  and  sometimes  very  serioiislv, 
to  the  amount  of  clauses,  and  whole  verses,  as  Dr.  James  in  his  BcH 
§um  Fmak  has  amply  testified.    Thus  Oie  Clementine  vulgate,  under 

S5to    ?"•  •"•®  ^  ^  Sixtine  bull,  carries  upon  it  the  seal  of  infal- 

Jilif  lily ! 

I  now  inyite  attention  to  tiie  subject  of  yesterday  eyening.  I  then 
•ndeavored  to  state,  as  briefly  as  I  could,  tiie  two  fundamental  errors 
on  which  the  Man  of  sin  stands.  The  >«/,— That  tiie  sacrifice  of  Je- 
sus C  host  was  not  alone  sufficient,  to  put  away  sin ;  and  the  second, 
— 1  hat  persons  can  do  more  tiian  tiieir  duty.  To  provoke  discussion 
on  these  two  great  doctrinal  lies,  I  stated  that  all  the  peculiar  doc- 
trines of  tiio  Roman  Cstiiolic  church,  via.  penance,  purgatory,  tran- 
substantiationt  and  all  this  priestiy  sacrifice,  confession,  Itc.  weru 


ROXAlf  CATHOLIC   EBMOIOW. 


27S 


Mil  upon  these  two  doctrinal  lies.    I  shall  not  further  discuss  thai 
auhiocTlill  the  g-^^- VffX\^^^^^^  church,  that  the 

is  essential  to  the  validity  of  that  ««^^^?\i^^;f3l^^^^^^^     of  nS  vali 
ordaining  a  priest  intend  io  ordam  him,  all  ^^^'^^^^^^  .„  ^^-^  ^,„,,, 
dity,  however  exact  the  f«"«  5  because  he  did^^^^^^  intention, 

to  ordain  him !  So,  in  consecrating  a  ^^^'^^^'J  J"^^'",  y^lue.  Such 
Us  nature  is  not  changed ;  and  the  recep  on  of  It,  ^^  '^^^^^^^^^^  ^^. 
intention  is  essential  U,  every  act  ^'Vt^/j,^"'}^^^^^ 

time,  the  word  anathema  is  usee  oy  i^«"t       ^nrmntintr  the  gospel. 

rpr^Slpf'Narif.^.,  bishop  P^^^^^^^^^^^ 

to  an,  mortal,  that  he  U  t™'y°';*«"lUTe  know  lu  hearts,  from 
faith  in  hiB  services  as  a  ^'^^"Y^^'^y^^^^^iZenlion  was  never 
Peter's  time  tUl  now,  >"t''°"i'*  ?.^7  *''\*''S.e  a^estoriri  official 
wanting  from  the  apostolic  age  till  n°*'  '"^J    j    „  certainty  in 

Unes.  ^This  doctrine  lays  *^™  V  Aj"*/^ %„  ^e  jodgment  of 
every  part  of  *e.Romanratho,c  religion  .for  tntn^^^   ^^^  .^ 

that  church  multitudes  of  her  clergy  ''"^f  J'^X™  "'Jiere  can  there- 
postors,  in  whose  intentions  at  any  prevmust™*^^'^^^^    ^ 

fore  be  no  faith.  So  far  as  P™^/""^      |°mTrotesUnt'^feels%o 

are  perfectly  free  from  tiils  '"^f"'"^*;,.  orSnces  of  religion.  The 
most  perfect  certainty  in  «»bmm  ng  to  the  ormnances  s  ^^ 

Protectant  minister  knows  and  'eaf  e?  ~|  °™'"^^^\,„d^     Pe,. 

saving  or  .^'^'ti^.^^X^V  revive  tC,T^^^^  *»'  ^'^  '^'^l.?" 
refficLTof'';£'e  ^^din^anc^cSendent'of  any  special  virtue  tn  hun 

that  does  administer  them.  ,    ^     Ughtly,  for  the 

On  the  subject  »^'°'^»'?^"''*^,i,7!L^^hichhas%een  carried 
W«.t  of  time.  The  nch  and  P/°fi^"«  "^^.J^^f  h„  merchandize 
on  by  Kome  in  tiie  sale  of  this  »"?g'?^V''fi°gliect  as  connect- 
"as  public  as  her  name.  The  «.»"»?'''"'*?  ™i,^!*J"Z  names  of  La- 
S  wiS.  Uie  Protestant  Reformation  '«  »«  f»"f 'f  ^'Verero^ion,  from 
ti,er  and  Tetiel.  It  is  a  »?'»"*  l^^'^^J^bankTwhU  tiie  ilergy 
the  doctrine  of  human  ment-tiiat  -mf «"««  ".""^"j "f  directors  was 
are  directors.    The  int«lerabk_  abuses  of  that  board  ot  ^  ^ 

the  punclum  «Uicn.  of  *f  i^°'«f^"l  ?'„!;nxtv  million  of  dollars, 
president  in  tiiat  day,  wanted  to  pay  off  some  ^^^^"^  g^  p^^^^  ^t 
Incurred  and  being  incurred  for  *«  «?1«"^'''  ^^^^^^^  ^a  an  indul- 
Bome.  He  published  a  plenary  ^"'^f.'?"  °lP^\*'  'as  a  matter  of 
gence  to  all  contributing  to  tiiis  «P'7,''ii""SlRim  of  tiiese  in- 
Suriosity  and  of  edificaUoo,  we  shall  here  read  ine  lonu 

dulgences. 


•»t6 


mMlS  fill  TBM 


■OMAN  CATHOUC    BBUGIOX. 


2T7 


w 

A 
1 


i 
\ 


2--«.  pet^-r  lit';  JTC  oAs;  io'S  SoT,Sr';iS'^li-i- 

W  to  ■»  u  thne  p«rU,  da  .bwlie  thee,  tnt  froinSfe^J^SLTi™™'''" 
•htere,  muKr  iher  fc.«  been  iocmi^Tttu^CnmMlST^^'"'*''' 

Uwheeaad  BrMfcenridn.  p.  S«.  H-<M«ro»eny  between  Mean. 

liie  coancil  ol  Trent    teaches  that  -  whoever  shair  affirm  that  wIm^h  tfc- 
p»re  of  justification  m  recciVed,  the  olfeoce  of  the  n««iLI^rri!«;?!        r      - 

trnvomi  ii«ii.|i™«„i  to  iM^SSTfol^i"  ni?^'  ^^i  there  remaiu.  .,o 

ciifned/*    Id.  ib.  M^i^.  n.    '      ™  ""  '"''"^*'  ""***=  "»  paigatoiy:  let  him  be  ac. 

rahm  w«  tbmiM  alto  hear,  in  tliis  pluse,  the  connetl  of  Tient- 

It  li  alM  an  article  of  faith  in  the  creed  of  Pius  IV  *•  thatTkl  ^i        r*- 

WBC®  inon  I 

Mlariiiitie,  that  p«at  cardiaal  of  the  Roman  r^ilinlL.  «.k.^k  /•    ^       .. 
J*  died  in  the  faith\e  willed  half  of  hii  mSZ  Si  Vi^-  M    ''  (^*<»^  «}»•«    . 
Ii«ll  to  her  ion)— Bellarminri™  h!-  Lw![  •o«I  to  the  Virwn  Manr  and  the  other 

■»  the  foundation  of  indulwncw^^b.t  !h  A^     i^^u  ^*'T'^  *"  ^***  *^**'"«'»'  "»>'«*» 
lrea.n^ofsa..ra/tip 

I  Will  not  branch  out  on  this  aubj^t  farther,  unleaa  the  «»ntlpm.« 
•fwes  to  meet  me  on  the  iMa  mml  i«jnments  jis?  n^anbm^ 
pfOTe  the  immoral  tendency  of  snch  indolgencCwZld^^K'be  ! 
*^  of  anpew«,gation.  if  «uch  a  work  wire  at  all  ZsiwT 
^^^m^l  of  trananbataiiliation,  the  c,«mI  of^  FimlV.  d^ 

Article^»i.  "  I  do  also  piofett,  that  in  the  nuat  Hmk  it  oflerod  nnto  G«i  .  #•«. 
ptiy».;»«t  propitwtofy  .acriiice  for  the  qniekZKhl  dS^2?th^  T-^k** 
Mtfaolj  sacrament  of  the  holvenchariit  tUiIiTt!!!,  -f  «   *    j    that,  in  the 
&!?%-»<*  Wood,  t^^theJ  ',Sh  ttStuI  a^d  tS^^^^^^  .ubstant udljr, 

Chfiit;  and  that  there  is  a  conTenLTlI;!.  «f  .k  "**/'7""tr  ""^  o"''  Lord  Jesus 
iliKi  the  body,  .,3^  the  wbde^bT^  rS^L'^iSt  •"^•^ "«•  of  the  bre«i 

•The  chnich  if  Ro.-ie  dechiS  X^  \^  dT^SSt™"*         •       . 
waitls,  Aoc  «M  €m9mmLmrui^\!^l:i^\  S    f "*? *  Prononncing  these 

the  species  or  acciieats  ooly  of  the  braad  and  wf»e  ?Jm^„^r^  ^k  •  *  V^"^] 
>t,iiflen  as  th«  iterifice  of  tfce  mm  h^l^Z^  h^!S^^^^^  ^^^^  "^^ 
pnm  communicates  alone,  arraZI^JS.!S7*  a7  "T^.*'  ''*^»°  tha 

Trent  declare,  that  ^ho^^T,^h^ Z'^J^^^^^  ""*l.*^*  .l**"^"  o** 
edoraboliahed,  is  -ccursed/*  Tview  of  All  p!^  ougrht  to  be  abrogat- 

rroni  the  best  aulhoritiT  br  Tk^niiL  '^*''^-'°."!'  <=o?P'l^d  wwi  elected 
Windsor,  Conn.  H^^uIb~^  *^''*""'  "'""**"  **^  *^'  «^«P«»  ««  ««t 

Itia  tiwaya  rigfat  to  altiel  a  doctrine  in  the  wmda  of 


urofess  it.    ETery  caidliial  doctrine  of  the  yapacy  cjm  be  traced  to  a 
oemin  period,  when  it  became  an  element  of  the  system. 

Monachism  began  to  be  taught  by  St.  Anthony  m  ^e  4th  centu^^ 

Auricular  conflssion  in  the  6ih ;  but  was  finally  esUblished  by  In- 

nocent  III.  eariy  in  the  13th  centuiy.  , 

Thporetical  Durffatory  began  to  be  spoken  of  from  the  Pagans  aim 

Je^rtSe trce^turj;  ^did  not  Sbtain  a  f  ^^d  Testdence  ti    m 

ihrco^ncil  of  Florence,  it  became  an  mtegral  part  of  infallibility 

^fiiriy in'the  7th  century  the  idea  of  univeisal  father,  or  pope  oh. 

"^uie  801  century,  after  Wny  and  ^'rilTr^^'X^A 
to  be  set  up ;  and  in  the  9th  became  an  integral  part  of  Roman  Ivamo- 

^Irthe  year  730,  a  cooncil  summoned  by  Leo.  HI.  with  only  one 
ii^Tl^^lie.  called  the  worship  of  images  and  re  ics  idolatry. 
Celibaly  aming  the  clergy  began  to  be  canonical  in  the  llth  cen- 

*"7.*the9th  century,  the  doctrine  of  tiansubstantiation  began  to  be 
talkel  of  cl^^^^^^^^         was  made  infallible  by  pope  Innocent  III. 

'^'sc^rofToi  Catholic  -niory,.  amrmed  tha^^^^^^^^^^^^ 

rh^^7  QuoteTSs  as  saying  so,  and  admite,  "though  the  scrip- 
?u^  Qufflast  aboye,  seems  clear' to  us.  and  ought  to  convmce  ajy 
mrn  tSat  fs  noTforward ;  yet.  it  may  justly  be  douWd,  whether  .t  be 
S^  (prayed  by  scripture.)  when  the  W  ^r^,,""^^^?^^^^ 
as  Scotus.  in  particular,  held  a  contrary  opm.on  *^"^'°»'  V^^'^^"' 
Ochan  and  bishop  Fisher,  mm  muUu  ahts,  held  the  same  opinion. 

AmonsPro^tants.  the  reason  and  authority  of  religious  belief  and 
nr^Ss, "  Thus  skith  the  Lord."     It  is  not  important  to  ascertain 

K  any  opinion  or  practice  began,.  ^-^J'^^'Z'^^f^^^^Ml^ 
h^^iUiif  BiaLi.  no  matter  how  ancient  it  may  be.  It  wants  aposioi  re 
L^on.  forTe  ip«ri^  saucUon  only  what  was  written  and  ordain*^ 
hrforLu^eir  death.  St.  Clement,  and  St.  Ignatius,  and  St.  Iren«u«. 
«d  all  AToSTsaints  in  the  Roman  .^lenlar.  weje  born  too  late  to 
sanction  any  article  of  feith,  or  morals,  by  their  »ote.  ^^ 

But  a  few  words  on  transubstantiation.  "  A  mrament,  says  nie 
chureh'  "U  routward  and  yisible  sign  of  some  inward  and  spiritual 
m^  "  Now.  it  cannot  be  both  the  sfgn  and  the  thing  ^YfuL  J.« 
CTthe  Euchlrist  be  >  sacrament,  it  cannot  be  true  that  It  is  the 
Wy  and  blood  of  Christ  transubstantiated.  Rome  ought,  then,  to 
•it-ibp  it  from  her  list  of  sacrameiite.  ^  i  _« 

But  Jesurwye  the  eucharist  for  a  »g«,  a  keepsake,  a  memonai  rf 
his  loVe  It^Aen.  a  commemoratiyi  institnUon.  as  well  as  a  »ig« 
of  New'Teium^^t  blessings:  "Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me." 
livl^er  tokens  of  lore,  it  has  inscribed  upon  it  the  name  of  the 
d,;I[r   Is  wrsdd  of  th;  passoyer;  it  is  <*.  Urd'.pauover.  so  say. 

'Xw"i^ali'rrd^aye  a  literal  and  figumtiye  meaning,  the  onl^ 
nuS^^;"e«isT  Are  these  words  to  be  ^J^^'^^^l^^^^^T'^ 
it  literally,  some  good  reason  must  be  offe«jd:  ""^  what  w  U^  t^ 
cause  soie  father,  pope,  or  council  so  decided  1    W  e  must  haye  tne 


'TSB 


||ttttAi*K   tyv    1*1tK 


h    1 


il 


i 


1 


wlUk  antliortsdl  tiMmi,  else  tlieir  deeition  is  a  mora  assiimpi* 

WImw  tiall  that  reasion  be  found  I  Is  it  because  Jesus  always  so 
•petiiES,  llist  be  inust  be  thus  understood  I  Then  I  contend,  that  when 
he  said,  **/  mm  the  door,''*  he  was  literally  transubstantiated  into  a 
door  I  and  when  he  said,  **  /  am  fke  hrtad  which  came  down  froni 
heavem,**  he  was  converted  into  bread;  am'  when  he  said,  '^lamtAo 
trm  Mne,"  he  was  literally  ehan^d  into  a  real  vine.  And  why  not  t 
Is  it  mora  irrational,  marvelous,  incredible,  than  that  "  this  loaf  is 
my  body,'*  should  mean  that  this  loaf  was  converted  into  his  body, 
•M  changed  Into  flesh;  and  that  while  the  apostles  were  eating  the 
loaf,  they  were  eating  the  living  flesh  of  him  that  stood  before  them  I ! 
Iff  then,  the  bishop  assumes  a  ftteral  interpretation  in  the  one  case;  I 
assume  it  in  these  and  various  other  passages.  For,  if  he  may  assume 
adUbUum^  m  mmj  I;  and  so  may  every  one  else;  and  then  what 
comes  of  the  certainty  of  language !  It  is,  then,  without  law,  precedent, 
Of  autlmiilf  ,  to  assume  the  very  point  in  debate ;  and  to  say,  that  be- 
cause It  leads  iMo  u  wy  Bodfy,  it  means  that  bread  is  converted  Into  flesh. 
This  style,  of  the  passage  in  dispute,  is  very  common  in  botTthe 
Old  and  New  Testaments.  So  early  as  the  time  of  Joseph,  we  read 
*'  the  seven  £ood  kine  are  seven  years,"-..and  ^*  the  seven  good  ears  are 
mmmk  jmmy  What  a  trausubstantiation !  But  change  are  into  re» 
■fmmd,  which  Is  its  meaning,  in  a  thousand  places,  and  all  is  plain. 

Again :  says  Jesus,  '*  Destroy  this  temple,''  pointing  to  his  body. 
•*  The  field  ■H  the  world — the  reapers  are  the  angels."— Are  these, 
als%  transiibtiantbtions  I  Paul  also  speaks  thus,  when  he  says  of  the 
iwklloreb,  «*  that  rock  mai  Christ.'^    And  John  the  apostle,  "the 
seven  stars  are  seven  angels;"  "the  seven  candlesticks  are  seven 
chuniies*'*    And  what  is  the  difference  between  these  phrases,  and 
••  tiiis  ia  ay  body  !'• — but  finally  on  this  part  of  the  subject,  Jesus 
■aid  nf  the  cup,  "  this  cup  is  the  New  Testament"    Does  not  that, 
on  the  bishop's  oremises,  prove  that  the  cup  was  changed  into  the 
New  Testament !  !     But,  it  by  pronouncing  over  a  loaf  the  words  of 
coQseciBtioii  a  f liest  has  power  to  change  bread  into  flesh,  and  wine 
into  blood,  he  has,  indeed,  a  power  truly  miraculous  and  divine ;  and 
woifca  as  many  miracles  in  the  whole  course  of  his  life  as  he  says 
masses.    A  claim  to  such  a  divine,  supernatural,  and  extraordinary 
power,  ought  not  to  be  claimed  upon  an  arbitrary,  capricious,  and 
whimslcfl  inteipretation  of  a  word  f  Good  rea^ns  ought  to  be  offered 
kf  any  man,  who  passes  himself  on  the  community,  as  possessing 
power  e<|tt8l  to  auickening  the  dead  and  suspending  the  laws  of  nature. 
Once  more,  lor  the  present :  If,  you  believe  the  priest  and  receive 
the  biead  as  flesh,  you  never  after  can  with  reason  believe  your  own 
•emses:  for,  when  your  eye  declares  it  bread,  and  your  senses  of 
ilMlliii||t  tasting,  feeling,  and  I  miffht  add,  your  hearing— all  declare 
that  tl  IS  still  bread  and  not  flesh— If,  I  say,  you  can,  contrary  to  your 
own  senses,  which  God  has  criven  you  as  the  means  of  knowledge 
and  certainty,  thus  implicitly  believe  the  declaration  of  a  priest ;  yon 
am  disqualifled  for  reasoning,  for  believing  the  christian  religion,  or 
your  own  senses  on  any  subiect  of  which  they  are  witnesses.    So 
that  it  may  be  truly  said,  he  that  believes  in  trausubstantiation,  can 
latioiiaily  believe  in  nothing  else.    All  the  christian  miracles,  were 
lo  m  believed»-^ot  because  they  were  contrary  to  the  evidence  of 
—•'■« '  bat  becaose  they  were  in  accordance  with  that  evidence. 


SOMAN   CATHOUC    RKLIGION. 


279 


I  cannot  anrae  this  point  with  any  sort  of  ability.  I  cannot  feel  in 
carnesU  I  seem  to  myself  as  if  1  were  reasoning  against  a  thing 
which  no  person  believed ;  and  I  never  could  with  any  sort  of  smnt, 
discuss  a  matter,  unless  there  was  some  little  show  of  plausibility, 
or  shadow  of  reason  in  it.  The  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  is  se 
absurd,  that  I  do  not  know  that  I  ever  read  a  tract  through  against  it  in 
my  life.  But  this  subject  gives  such  glory  to  the  priests  and  has 
WTOUirht  such  miracles  upon  the  superstitious  crowd,  that  it  is  worm 
more  to  sustain  the  priesthood,  than  all  the  other  six  Roman  sacra- 
ments.  And  that  which  causes  this  most  incredible  of  all  things,  to 
be  devoured  by  such  multitudes  is,  that  it  expiates  sin:  Hence  the 
body  of  Christ  is  daily  eaten  by  hundreds  of  ^^^o^^a^^^s,  as  a  sin  ot- 
ferine  together  with  "his  «m/  and  divinity,"  as  decided  by  the  coun- 
cil of  Trent !  The  Messiah  is  then  always  suff^enng,  always  bleed- 
inir,  always  dying,  always  expiating  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himselt ; 
wS  his  people  are  always  literally  devouring  his  flesh !  What  a  pic- 
ture !!    1  shall  turn  away  from  it ;  for  my  soul  sickens  at  the  thought. 

Protestants  know  that  the  sin  of  forgetfulness  is  the  easily  beset- 
tine  sin  of  mortals ;  and  that  they  need  commemorative  insUtuUons. 
Hence,  they  highly  appreciate  the  honor  of  having  a  Lord  s  table,  a 
Lo^'s  supper,  I  hJly  communion  and  fellowship,  through  these  sa- 

J;S^emblem8  of  a  slvior's  love.  " 'fH^o^^^^i^*^ 7^V•^V  ^^ 
the  aposUe,  "is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  body  of  ^brisU  ine 
cup  Tver  which  we  give  thanks,  is  it  not  the  communion,  or  the  joii^ 
participaaon  of  his  blood  1  "-Hence,  the  New  Testament  with  ite 
Liritukl  and  heavenly  blessings  is  always  contemplated,  reaUxed,  and 
remembered  with  holy  thankfulness  m  the  christian  assemblies,  while 
they  partake  of  the  sacred  emblems  of  that  great  sacrifice  "once  of- 
fer^  for  the  sins  of  many.  For  by  one  offering  up  of  himself,  he  has 
Ibrever  perfected  them  who  are  sanctified. 

Having  yet  remaining  a  few  minutes,  I  shall  prepare  theway  f« 
the  introSuction  of  my  seventh  proposition.  Having Jouch^j^^^^ 
roots  of  all  the  principal  corruptions,  and  having  yet  heard  nothing  in 
J^W,  I  will  anficipalTthat  proposition  with  a  few  remarks  on  the  pa- 
pistical  notion  of  a  judge  of  controversy.  _ 

The  council  of  Trent  decreed  "  that  the  oral  traditions  of  the  Cath- 
olic church,"  (meaning  the  Roman)  "are  to  be  received, par.  2«e/a^« 
X/«  ae  r^verefUia  mJiipit  ac  ren.rfl/«r,-with  equal  piety  and  rever- 
ence  as  the  books  of  the  bid  and  New  Te8tament."-Council  of  Trent 

*%rcn  X  asserts  :  "  It  belongs  to  the  church  to  judge  of  the  trae 
sense  and  interpretation  of  scripture ;  and  that  no  person  shall  dare 
to  interpret  it  in  matters  relating  to  faith  and  manners  to  any  sen^ 
w^nSary  to  that  which  the  chureh  has  held,  or  contrary  to  the  unam- 
Dious  consent  of  the  fathers."— lb.  Id. 

And  according  to  the  33rd  article  of  the  creed  of  pope  Pi""  Ij 
"I  do  acknowledge  the  Holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Roman  chureh 
to  be  the  mother  Ld  mistress  of  all  churehes ;  and  I  do  promise  and 
swSr  true  obedience  to  the  bishop  of  Rome,  the  successor  of  Peter, 
the  orince  of  the  apostles,  and  the  vicar  of  Chnst. 

Xre  ^en,  we  have  th^  essential  elements  of  mental  slavery  and 
dfiiradation  •  for,  if  no  person  dare  to  interpret  the  Scriptures  contra- 
iT&ke  chureh  hL  already  held  orjto  the  unanimous  consent 
3  the  Faaiers;  where  is  that  liberty  of  thought  and  speech  and  ac 


r 


ill 


1 


PUPA'PM.  ON  VMM  . 

Him,  CM  Hwrnott  iaMlaiit  of  mil  milJMits,  out  moral  and  religlMt  m^ 
MuMi  wMioiit  whieli,  liberty  is  without  metning,  and  mental  inde* 
P'lideiiee  'bat  a  name  f 

Ib  all  monarebies,  save  that  of  Rome  and  Mahomet,  a  jndge  is  not 
tonalitntionttlly  a  judge  of  his  own  case.  But  the  Roman  judffe  of 
oontroTeroy  is  the  whole  churchi  says  my  learned  opponent,  and  her 
•ouneils  affirm  ¥rith  him.  The  whole  chureh  jadginf|r  then  between 
what  parties  f  Herself  and  the  heretics !!  What  a  ngfateous,  infal- 
lible and  lepubliean  judge,  is  the  supreme  judge  of  controTeray  in  the 
Caiiolic  church !  The  controversy  is  between  two  parties— 4he  ehuieh, 
«r  the  clerey,  on  one  side;  and  the  heretics  or  the  reformers  on  the 
other,  as  tiey  may  hap^n  to  be  ealled  %  say  the  church  and  the  here- 
ties.  And  who  is  umpire,  who  is  supreme  Judge  of  both  !  One  of 
the  paitiea,  indeed,  the  ehnieh  herself  I  This  is  the  archetype— the 
hmm  Uml^  of  civil  libeity,  and  republican  government,  in  the  supreme 
Roman  hierarchy.  It  will  not  help  it  to  place  the  ermine  on  the  pope. 
Me  is  that  instant  exparte  judge.  And  besides,  he  is  executive  of 
the  church.  If  the  pope  is  to  be  judge,  and  executive,  and  lawgiver, 
in  the  ease  as  he  frequently  is,  what  a  splendid  picture  of  a  republi- 
can pietident  or  judge  have  we  got  in  the  Roman  church ! 

This  ghostly  despotism  is  to  be  sustained  and  defended  too,  by  the 
whole  ehnreh,  by  vows,  oaths,  and  pledges,  the  most  solemn  and  bind* 
ing  thatreliffion  can  suggest,  or  human  ingenuity  devise.   It  is  trae  she 

£ififfiit  by  ner  bishops,  liie  popes  make  bishops,  on  the  recommen- 
tion  of  bishops,  and  these  bishops  serve  the  pope  and  govern  the 
people.  Their  oath,  whieh  is  the  same  in  all  countries,  1  will  now 
waif  ao  lar  at  least,  as  relates  to  this  matter.  I  have  the  original, 
•III  diierent  translationa  of  it,  and  if  it  be  disputed,  I  am  prepared  to 
•nstain  it.  To  reconcile  it  to  the  genius  of  our  institutions,  and  to  the 
■afety  and  happiness  of  our  country,  will  require  the  explanations  and 

rsaaoaingt  of  my  jfriend. 

••  I,  n,mm  of  th«  church  of  If.  fipon  heiicefon»Md  will  be  frithfsl  and  obe- 
iient  Co  Si  PMmr  th«  Apostle,  and  to  the  boljr  Rounn  church,  end  to  our  lord. 
the  lord  N.  Pope  N.  end  hit  niccetion,  amonicaliy  coming  in.  I  will  neither 
advise,  coaaeat,  or  do  any  thing  that  they  amy  lose  life  or  member,  or  that  their 
peraoM  wm  be  leiied,  or  bands  any  wise  laid  upon  them,  or  anj  iujuries  offered 
lo  thtm,  under  any  pretence  whatsoever.  The  counsel  which  they  shall  intrust 
to  me  withal,  by  tbeni»elves,  their  messengers,  or  letters.  I  will  not  knowinriy 
reveal  to  any  to  their  prejudice.  I  will  help  them  to  defend  and  keep  the  Ro- 
man impacy,  and  the  loyaltiea  of  St.  Peter,  savinr  my  order,  acaiost  all  men.  The 
iecate  of  the  apostolic  see,  going  and  coming.  I  will  honorably  treat  and  help 
liilis  necessities.  The  rkhts.  honors,  privUi^es, and  authority  of  Ae  h^ 
maa  church  of  our  Loid  tie  FOpe.  and  his  foresaid  successors.  I  will  endeavor 
to  peserve.  defend,  increase,  and  advance.  -I  will  not  be  in  any  counsel,  action, 
•rirc^y,  in  which  shall  be  plotted  waintt  oar  said  lord,  andfthe  said  Roman 
«h«ch,  any  thing  to  tbn  hnit  or  prmodicn  of  their  persons,  right,  honor,  state 
'^  power;  and  if  I  shall  know  any  such  thing  to  be  treated  or  agitated  by  any 
jever.  I  wUl  signify  it  to  our  said  lord,  or  to  some  other  by  whom  it  may 
to  hia  kttowle(%e.  The  rules  of  the  holy  Fathers,  the  apoalolic  decrees. 
■ifcM^,  or  disposals,  rcaervations,  provisions,  and  mandates,  I  will  observe 
frith  all  my  might;  and  cause  to  be  observed  by  others.  Heretics,  schismatica, 
•nd  rebels  to  our  said  lord,  or  his  foresaid  successors,  I  will  to  my  utmost  power 
persecute  and  o|mose.*' 
The  Latin  or  the  last  sentence  of  which  reads : 

••  Mereticos.  schismaticos.  et  rebelles.  eidem  domino  nostro  vet  succMsorfhut 
pnedicti*  pro  posse  persequar  et  impugnabo.*' — [Pontificale  Roman.  Edit.  Ant- 
werp. A.  l>.  1«S6. 
Here  then  Is  the  most  solemn  pledge  and  vow  given  hy  every  hitmp 


4Mmm,  th»»  h*  wUl  to  the  utnwat  of  hia  POwer  |«fii«^  «;"^ 
Znl^and  tMmaim !    Does  not  this  Indiaputable  faet,  alo^  iw- 
tain  my  «•» entli  piopoaitioii,  and  ijiove  ^^^J&j^^^^ 
eimraii  ia  anti-American  and  essentially  oppoaed  to  tiM  «iit«M»oC  aU 
itm  inMitntaooa  I    [Time  expired.] 

Bishop  Pueceu.  riset— 

You  perceive,  my  friend^  that  Aera  k  acaioely  »  "^J^*  ^•^  ~ 
Roman  Catholie  Mth,  which  my  firiend  has  not  hiought  into  view 
this  mominfl.    How  then  am  I  to  escape  the  charge  of  deaultwinesa, 
In  following  such  an  argument !    The  whole  category,  «<«*  .^l*f  *® 
Omega,  shoots  up  before  me,  shilling  with  the  rapidity  of  IjfhfiinfT 
It  is  the  necessary  effect  of  the  confusion  <rf  my  learned  meml  a  i0eaa« 
snd  of  the  order  in  which  he  arranged  the  propositiona  whose  diflei»- 
sion  was  to  call  them  forth.    The  very  first  of  these  woposttionsj-tlio 
first  word  of  it— Holy— would  have  called  up  for  discussion  all  wo 
have  heard  on  the  immorality  of  the  church.    As  my  ftiend  thongM 
fit  to  commence  as  he  has  done,  order  and  method  conUnue  to  be  ex* 
iled  from  this  debate.  He  selected  the  points  of  attack  and  the  olan  of 
campaign ;  let  him  not  charge  on  me  his  own  blundera,  whwh  m  Mas 
now;  too  late.    There  was  one  great  question  whkh  he  should  have 
determined,  a  Uminet  it  would  have  cut  off  all  this  dejritofy  atp. 
mentation.    Itiatiiis.    Did  Jesus  Christ  establish  an  mWlible  tribu- 
nal to  determine  the  meaning  of  scripture  t    If  so,  we  are  bound  by  ili 
decisions.    If  not,  tiie  whole  Catholic  reUgion  fells  to  »•  8'<»^ 
Now,  my  friends,  I  endeavored  to  prove  that  Chnatditf  estabUah  ao^ 
a  tribunal,  and  I  defy  any  one  to  bring  from  the  Bible  prwtf  to  tbo 
eoBtrary.    One  text  alono  is  sufficient  to  put  this  matter  at  ml  ler 
ever.    "The  ehnreh  ia  tiie  piUar  and  ground  of  Oie  *">»•      iz2!2 
to  enforce  my  argument,  when  my  time  expired,  and  my  friend  seemei 
unwilling  to  let  slip  Uie  opportunity,  but  got  up  immediacy,  and  said 
that  my  last  observations  of  yesterday  wore  unworthy  of  no^. 

He  brought  aa  a  paniUel  to  the  woida,  "  I  am  with  yon  u^^avsovM 
to  the  end  of  the  world,"  Ae  ouslomary  ancient  salutation,  ••  the  l«ortM 
with  you ;"  and  argued  fiOBi  this,  that  Christ's  words  mean  no  more  than 
that !  But,  my  fnends,  what  point  of  comprison  is  tiiere  between  tho 
words,  •*  God  be  wiOi  you,"  which  one  frail  man  addresses  to  another, 
and  the  words,  tho  solemn  promises  of  Uie  Savior,  oommissioniM  hw 
inosdes  to  preach  hia  goaMl,  and  cheering  thew  deopondenoy  by  tho 
itvine  assurance,  "  BohoU,  I  am  with  yoo  all  davv  oven  to  tho  eai  of 
tho  worldr  Are  tho  two  oosoo  tho  same!  Are  f •  »<V'**'?/'S 
that  Chriot  la  with  hia  ehaieli  fomvor,than  we  are  of  the  offiset  of  «• 
•alntaOon  of  a  poor  faUiblo  man!    What  Christ  does  la  mfeHibloi 


what  he  says  wfll  come  to  pass.  If  his  chureh  WMtofiul,  wo 
have  had  aa  assurance  to  that  effect  in  tho  Bible.  There  is  nono.  If 
his  chureh  was  to  fail,  we  should  have  had  miraculouo  dioplays  lijo 
that  of  Sinai,  and  of  tiio  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  at  P^j^f^at,  mart. 
inf  tho  eommeooementof  a  new  era.  Or  Christ  weald  havo  ooao 
again  upon  earUi,  rebuked  and  banished  error,  and  restored  the  ptiml* 
nvo  lustre  and  beauty  of  truth.  This  has  not  been  dono^  n«ir  haa  saeli 
m  Mophecy  been  any  where  made.  Aa  Christ,  by  one  oblation,  hao 
perfecUd  those  that  wore  to  be  sanotiiod  for  over ;  so  has  ho  by  ono 
t9  *^ 


Ill 


wvvlftlioii,  mimireii  m  of  diviM  tratli  hi  raligioii  f&r  evw.  The  worl 
^Qoi  tfrai,  nedkMl  eo  mformatioti.  If  mbn's  monA»  were  bid,  tiier 
ilMnM  hm%  been  eeneeted,  but  lelifion  tkoalil  noc  lisfe  been  changed. 
]■  i  wofd,  ntf  BMiofi  Smith  of  Kentnehy,  hat  m  #ell  toid,  **  Reform- 
ation ahootd  hiTO  taken  place  in  the  ehureh,  not  out  of  ft"  Let  raf 
friend  twiat  the  words  of  Ghriataa  hepleeaett  he  can  find  nothing  like 
in  hnman  langnage.  Christ  was  God  and  his  word  is  what  it 
>rt8  to  be.  He  is  with  his  church  all  days,  until  the  consamma- 
itf  ef  am.  The  heaYena  and  the  earth  naj  pass  away,  but  his 
ireid  will  neter  pass  away.  TTie  worse  we  beeome,  the  more  refrio- 
My  and  loMihMiMle,  the  farther  from  apostolle  times  and  fenror  and 
filiyy  iM'tfiie  need  hsTO  we  of  authority  to  control  us.    So  that  the 


'Of  thechnreh  to  maintain  nnity  of  Mth,  which  Christ  so  much  de 
sifed  for  hit  diteipleat  lit  tt  least,  as  neeessary  now  as  it  hat  ever  been. 
The  necettily  of  tiibliiitiinf  to  the  church  doet  not  destroy  liberty, 
while,  on  the  contrary,  the  tonuses  of*  error  and  contentions,  among 
teeta  which  mndertake  to  judge  for  themselvet,  tie  endlessly  multi- 
plied. ChriaC  foresaw  Ihe  tne  when  even  the  apostles  would  dis- 
pute. He  knew  the  Itehinf  of  the  Greeks  for  noTolty,  and  their  prone- 
to  ditpntatioo— elwayt  leamlvf  and  never  coming  to  the  trnth^- 
dowu  to-day,  and  hnildinf  np  to-morrow :  one  wsTe  of  error 
■hi  followinf  another,  and  waahing  away  every  doctrine,  and 
I,  and  aeel,  in  its  turn ;  and  he  therefore  said :  **  Hear  the  church.*^ 

My  iriend  argued  in  the  commencement  of  thia  controversy,  that 
liMe  theie  were  aa  good  men  among  Prolettantt  aa  among  CathoUct, 
why  ahottld  there  be  any  arguBentl  Let  him  antwer  that  qnestion 
ainoe  be  it  the  challtnger.  I  eheerfolly  admit  the  foot,  bnt  what  ia 
ili  Werence!  Why  Int  thote  Protestants  were  better  than  thehr 
yiliieiplet.  Every  man  who  follows  out  the  Protestant  principles  may 
It  bMJ  He  warn  ind  hU  mm  code  of  morals  as  well  as  his  doctrinal 
Me,  in  the  Bible.  Becanae  if  he  choose  to  interpret  the  Bible  for 
klmteif,  in  memlt  at  well  at  in  faith,  he  may  argue  from  it  in  favor  of 
the  lawflilnett  of  lay  lilif  he  pleases.  And  is  it  not  true  that  certain  vi- 
eieas  acts  are  done  b^noiB^  men  on  the  pretence  of  their  being  allowed 
1^  teri|itQre1  I  oonM  addnee  hondreds  of  instances  of  the  strong  and 
lenible  MntitM  aad  eiimet,  for  which  their  victims  persuaded  them- 
ttlvet  they  fotnd  a  tiiiellon  in  the  Bible.  And  if  the  tincerely  piont, 
the  hnmane  and  charitable  cif  Protettant  commnnionn  ask  them- 
telvetthe  quettion:  "are  the  virtnet  I  ttrive  to  practice,  the  fruits  of 
my  legion  V*  they  would  find  that  their  peculiar  tenets  have  no  in- 
iueme  on  their  conduct.  Their  piety  and  the  purity  of  their  morals 
are  the  effects  of  natiially  good  diapoaitiont,  of  virtnoua  attociationt, 
of  pfincipiet,  which  they  hold  in  eonoMM  with  Catholiet,  a  leverenee 
lot  the  divinity  and  a  detiie  for  fotnre  happlnett,  a  teate  of  honor,  de- 
foram^  iwepliily,  Iw. 

In  this  kind  of  virtue  even  pagans  htve  been  eminent,  hut  their 
virtue  it  no  proof  of  tlie  goodnett  of  their  lellgieii.  Aittttdet  wat 
foMf  Scipio  ehatloy  Begulot  patriotie,  Plato  tober,  Cineinnatut 
unambitiout,  TItna,  the  delif  ht  of  the  human  mee,  and  Antontnut, 
piont— and  jet  they  were  all  Idolatera !  There  are,  thank  heaven,  cot« 
ttiftifO  |Minciplet  in  man's  bosom,  which  correct  in  conduct,  what 
IB  wrong  m  prineiple.  But  if  we  sincerely  deairt  to  know  the  fruitt 
of  the  tefonMlion,  we  have  only  to  atk  its  authors.  Hear,  then,  what 


SOMAH  CA^TBOIrir   XSUOION. 

liUther  wat  compelled  to  acknowledge  upon  thit  subject.  »*  We  see,** 
tayt  he,  in  hit  termon  the  8nd  Sunday  in  Adven^  "  that  ihioagh  the 
midioe  of  the  Devil,  men  are  now  more  avaricioua,  more  eruel,  more 
diaoidefly,  more  intolent,  aidl  much  more  wicked,  thmn  they  w«e 
under  popery."  •♦  If  any  one  wiah,  saya  Musculus,  to  see  a  roultttude 
of  knaves,  disturbers  of  Ihe  public  peace,  &c.  let  him  go  to  t  city^,  where 
Ike  ooepel  is  preached  in  its  purity,  (he  means  a  reformed  city)  tor 
it  in  eteiicr  than  the  Ught  <rf  day,  that  there  never  were  pagaM 
more  vicious  and  ditorderiy,  than  those  professore  of  the  gwpel. 
«  The  thing,"  says  Melancthon,  "  speaks  for  itself  m  this  country 
among  the  reformed ;  their  whole  time  is  devoted  to  intemperMice  and 
drunkenness,  (immanibus  poculis).    So  deeply  are  the  people  sunk 
into  bariiarity  and  ignorance,  that  many  of  them  would  imagine  the^ 
should  die  in  the  night,  if  they  should  chance  to  ftst  m  the  day. 
Ad  tjapt.  vi.  Mat.  Neither  was  the  growth  of  vice  and  ignorance  con- 
fined to  Germany.   They  grew  wherever  the  seeds  of  the  refonnation 
were  pwmitted  to  take  root.  « In  this  mrftW  (England)  says  Stubbs, 
after  he  had  made  the  tour  of  the  island,  "  I/outid  a  general  deew  of ^ 
good  worktj  or  raiker  a  plain  drfeetum,  or  failing  away  from  God. 
(Motives  to  good  works.  An.  1596.)     But  hear  how  the  eloquent 
Erasmus  describes  the  fruits  of  the  reformation.     He  was  mdeed  a 
Catholic,  but  a  Catholic  whom  the  Protestants  allow  to  have  been 
impartial.     He  was  an  eye  and  ear  witness  to  the  introduction  ^ 
progress  of  the  reformation,  observed  its  workings  with  the  eye  of  m 
philosopher,  and  has  marked  them  down  with  the  accuracy  of  a  can- 
did and  correct  historian.    "And  who,"  he  says,  "are  the  gospel 
people  1    Look  around  you  and  shew  me  any  who  has  become  a  bet- 
ter man.     Show  me  one  who,  once  a  glutton,  is  now  turned  sober,  on© 
who,  before  violent,  is  now  meek;  one  who,  before  avMicious,  is 
now  generous ;  one  who,  before  impure,  is  now  chaste ;— I  can  point 
out  multitudes,  who  have  become  far  worse  than  they  were  De'o'e.  in 
their  assemblies,  you  never  see  any  of  them  heave  a  sigh ;  shed  a 
tear ;  or  strike  his  breast,  even  on  the  days  that  are  sacred  to  afflicUon. 
Their  discourses  are  little  else,  but  calumnies  against  the  priesthoot 
They  have  abolished  confession,  and  few  of  them  confess  their  sins 
even  to  God.    They  have  abrogated  fasting ;  and  they  waUow  m 
sensuality.     They  have  become  Epicureans,  for  fear  of  bemg  Jews. 
They  have  cast  off  the  yoke  of  human  institutions ;  and  along  with 
it,  they  have  shaken  off  the  Lord.    So  far  from  being  submissive  to 
bishops,  they  are  disobedient  to  the  civil  magistrates.    Wha^  tumults 
and  seditions  mark  their  conduct!     For  what  trifles  do  Uiey  fly  to 
armtl    St.  Paul  commanded  the  first  christians  to  shun  the  society 
of  the  wicked;  and  behold  I  the  reformere  seek  most  the  societjr  of 
the  most  corrupted.  These  are  their  delight.  The  gospel  now  flounsh- 
et  foraooth !  because  priests  and  monks  take  wives  in  opoosition  to 
human  lavrs  and  despite  of  their  sacred  vows.    Own  it  is  follv  to  ex- 
ehange  evils  for^evils,  and  madness  to  exchange  small  evils  for  great 
ones?'    Ep.  47.  Lib.  31.  John  Wesley  says,  speaking  of  his  own 
time  not  one  hundred  and  fifty  yeara  ago,    "^  dissipated  age  {Bnch 
as  is  the  present  perhaps  beyond  all  that  ever  were,  at  least  that  are 
recorded  m  history)  is  an  age  wherein  God  is  generally  forgotten. 
And  a  dimipaied  nation,  (such  as  England  is  at  present,  ma  superla- 
tive degree)  is  a  nation,  a  vast  majority  of  which  has  not  God  '  in  all 
their  thoughts.'    We  therefore  speak  an  unquestionable  truth,  when 


i 


p 

r 

3 

e 


i 

1 

1 


III 

m 

I 


Wtt  W •  there  it  101  on  tlM  iMo  of  tlM  oiitii  muahm  Mtton  f  mt  lowl 
litt wo liAYO ofor  lioud of )  MovmemliwSmiimkimdumg^d^fmA 
oalj  to  tolrilf  witlMMt  God  in  io  woifd,  but  to  opohIt  ■otttng  hm 
■t Itiuioe.  ThofO  iiO¥«r  wti  anotftitlMl  wo  rooi  of  m  hit toryt  iwco 
Julius  Cewf,  liiioo  Hod^  linco  Adas,  wImmii  diosiMlaoB  or  nn- 
goiiliiieM  aM  fo  ipi||illf  fmrmk,  both  tmong  lii^  and  low,  ndi  and 
itof .•♦  Noitliof  #111  it  lio  woU  w  •  Pfotestant,  m  oidor  to  mAogm 
im  tiio  disoiders,  wMoh  I  hwm  roontioDed,  to  say— ^*  that  thoy  were 
only  tho  accidental  ofils  of  a  moment,  evils  of  a  period  of  cham 
and  Ibniontation."  What  1  tho  irsi  Ihiits  of  a  ralbrmation  disoider ! 
»lh0  inl  Ifuita  of  a  syHen  of  piety  lioentiousoess !«— the  first  fruits 
of  the  reestahlishment  of  the  law  of  timth,  impiety !  Suiely  sneh  an 
anoioiry,  and  yet  it  is  often  made*  ■•  absolntely  weak !  There  are  mnlu- 
plied  attestations  of  it.  "  MfcrvUe,*'  says  Neal.  speaking  of  the  time 
of  Elisabeth,  and  when  the  fennentations  of  the  reToluUcnafy  Yio- 
lenoe  of  the refcmnation  had  subsided,  '* nmenM  amdkmtkemik  wot 
Us  comiilssfli  ^  lilt  c«imi%  f«  regmd  to  relifton.**  That  y«m  may 
fom  some  notion  of  their  eondition,  hear  in  what  manner  the  inhabi- 
tiala  of  London,  in  a  petttion  presented  to  the  parliament  durtng  this 
raiga,  express  themtelYes.  '•  In  one  half  our  churchea,"  they  say, "  we 
have  wnlahmen  thai  have  no  eyes;  and  clouds  that  have  no  water ; 
and  in  the  other  half,  there  is  sesfoely  one  tenth  man  that  takes  con- 
■ilnnii  HI  wait  on  his  chaiss.  Whereby,  the  Lord's  day  is  often  to- 
ta%  Hglseindi  ignorance  inoroaseth,  and  wickedness  eometh  upon 
08  like  an  armed  man."  •«  In  the  county  of  Cornwall,*'  Neal  says, 
••there  were  at  this  period  a  hundred  and  forty  clergymen,  not  one  of 
whom  could  preaeh  a  semon."  The  situation  of  other  counties  was 
iMivif  ilBilar.  Judge  of  the  consequences.  I  hsTC  here  the  anthen- 
tie  donUDiBtB,  Luther's  and  Westey'a  works,  to  prove  what  I  have 
eilnd.  Bore  is  the  great  fother  of  iie  reformation;  with  Melancthon 
at  hit  tiis,  both  very  wifloil^  looking  personages,  m  fkmr  Aneet,  «e- 
fin  on  iwmgt  of  the  cnmix !!  (Holda  an  a  large  and  old  volume,  and 
iaaniibea  a  Sralo,  with  hit  peraon,  exhibiting  the  pictured  title  page,  at 
vhinh  there  was  eontianed  Imghter.)  This  edition  was  published  by 
Lawrence  Mmaek  at  WiltMiAii,  in  1661.  Herr  is  image  worehrn 
by  Martin  Liiier  and  his  eo-refiMiMr!  and  beasts,  and  monstensll 
anmnd  them.  Mr.  C.  says  that  the  popes  mivhi  have  been  much 
worse  men  than  he  has  deisiibed  them.  That  bad  acta  are  soon  for- 
milBB,  and  good  ones  more  apt  to  be  cfaraideled.  This  is,  unfortu- 
nmsifi  not  the  case,  as  history  but  too  well  attests.  Thevirlaosaretoo 
unohtnialvo  to  attract  pubHe  noiiee,  and  Shakspeare,  who  wan  a 
elonn  ohaarver  of  human  nalnre,  inys:  If  I  can  quote  him  eomntlyi 

**Th«  svii  that  men  do,  itvct  «ftrr  tb«in  ; 

Tha  good  it  oH  inUrrMl  with  tMr  bonct.** 
1  am  sorry  to  say,  my  friends,  Professor  ligii  informs  Bin,%iwt 
want  of  time  has  prevented  htm  from  examiniiy  thoworiu  of  Li|«on« 
in  relerenoe  to  my  opponent's  aoensalion,  basodnDon  this  book.  Thsss 
ismfiailnman  of  Isaming  and  intofrity,  in  this  city,  who  is  not  a  Cap 
thalS,  Mr.  Alsxaador  Klnmoiil,  who  will  devote  some  lioM  to  it,  rai 
who  will  be  here  at  half-past  four,  P.  M.  and  give  ns  the  requisite  te- 
formation.  i  again  say,  1  hope  a  large  andienoe  will  be  present  at  Iha 
iemmewmtL  Bly  friend  told  as  he  slurred  over  what  was  wont  ih  ths 
charges  against  Catholios.  He  has  taken  a  new  mode  of  doing  this. 
Me  has,  iadaed,  tiii  iii  impKi  tai  hslpo  itby  a  vague,  bH  Mt  a  ikf- 


SOMAH  OATSOLIO    SKblGION. 

ring  insinuation,  that  them  is  more.  Bit  troMlaiion  uxmld  make  tha 
lULlen  priests'  sm  ss  bad  as  that  of  the  Corinthian  that  afflicted  by  his 
seaadalotts  crime  the  fervent  duistisns  of  antiquity,  instead  of  being 
of  m  diffiuent  and  less  heinous  kind.  I  appreciate  his  motives.  Tho 
chsrsa  is,  as  I  have  already  stated— 4he  chnich  punishes  §everely  for 
the  slightest  fault,  and  excommunicates  the  impenitent  offender,  p^wg 
him  up  to  the  civil  tribunal,  for  the  punishment,  in  such  cases,  inflicted 
in  some  countries  by  the  law  of  the  land. 

Me  says,  we  find  from  the  decrees  of  councils,  that  scandal  has 
existed  in  the  church.  It  is  true;  and  it  is  also  true  that  Christ  pre- 
dicted its  existence.  What  is  the  world  but  the  theatre  of  fiilsehood 
apd  truth  1  a  field  of  tares  and  wheat  I 

As  for  the  other  volume  which  the  gentleman  has  broujgrht  up,  the 
Seereta  Monita  of  the  Jesuits,  1  pronounce  it  an  infamous  forgery.  It 
has  been  proved  a  hundred  times,  that  no  priest  had  any  hand  in  that 
document.  "  The  Monita  Secrets,  or  private  instructions,  a  publican 
tion  sometimes  brought  forward  against  the  Jesuits,^'  says  the  learned 
Charles  Butler,  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  "  is  a  most  infamous  work,  and 
wholly  beneath  notice.  Neither  the  original,  nor  any  certified  Qppy 
of  this  work,  was  ever  produced;  no  circumstances  respecting  its  dis 
covery,  ever  proved ;  no  collateral  fact,  to  establish  its  authentici^, 
ever  published.  There  does  not  live  the  Jesuit,  or  the  scholar  of  a 
Jesuit,  who,  if  any  one  of  the  doctrines  which  it  inculcates,^  or  any 
one  practice  which  it  recommends,  were  [proposed  to  him,  would  not 
spurn  it  with  indignation."  Francis  Xavier  was  a  Jesuit;  our  first 
archbishop,  Carroll,  was  a  Jesuit;  they  were  botii  worthy  of  being 
numbered  among  the  best  of  men,  and  it  was  trut^  not  forged^  instru» 
tions  that  made  them  so.  The  copy  of  this  notorious  slander,  on  one 
of  the  most  virtuous,  learned,  and  apostolic  societies  that  have  ever 
existed,  the  gentleman  informa  us,  was  brought  to  this  country  from 
France  by  the  secretary  of  La  Fayette !  and  what  was  the  relijgion  of 
this  secretary  !  A  Jacobin,  an  infidel,  one  of  the  anti-christian  con* 
spirators,  that  would  have  blotted  all  denominations  of  the  followen 
of  Jesns,  as  well  as  the  Catholic,  frim  the  whole  world  !  BjpnuU^ 
it  it  well  known,  that  such  men  meant  ministera  of  every  creed ; 
and  against  all,  but  chiedy  agaioat  those  best  able  by  learning  and 
virtue  to  confound  them,  was  their  hostility  directed. 

A  greater  than  La  Fayette,  as  a  statesman,  I  mean  Thomas  Jeffer- 
son, said  of  the  Presbyteriansr—"  Their  ambition  and  tyranny  would 
tolerate  no  rival  if  they  had  power.  The  Presbyterian  clergy  are  the 
loudest,  tbe  most  int«^rant,  of  all  sects,  the  moat  tyranniciil  and  am 
bitioaa;  ready  at  the  wcnrd  of  the  lawgiver,  if  saeh  a  wmd  oould  now 
be  obtained,  to  pot  the  toroh  to  the  pUe,  and  to  nkiadlo  ia  this  virgin 
handspbora  the  fbaea  in  idiiah  thair  oiaola,  CiAvia»  eoosuBMd  tht 
poor  tevataa,  beeause  ha  eoald  not  aabscriba  tha  prepoiitto*  of  CM- 
via,  that  ma|pstrates  hava  a  ri^ht  to  exterHiinate  all  horaties  to  iha 
Calviaiatic  eraod.  They  pant  to  re-establish  by  law,  that  Holy  Inqai- 
lition,  whieh  thoy  can  now  only  infuse  into  pnblio  opinion."  p.  ^18, 
latter  to  William  Short.  WiU  my  friend  taka  thia  teatimony  la  iha 
letter  I  JeiEeraon  had  more  opportanitiea  for  judging  thaa  La  Fsyelt^ 
aad  ha  know  this  ooontry  bottar.  Bat,  sir,  I  agrea  with  La  Fa¥et^ 
that  all  priests  are  to  be  droadod  ta  Ihia  aaase ;  that  none  of  them  ahoald 

ha  allowad  a  particla  of  poUtioal  aaeeadeaey  ia  ihia  oountry.    Oar 


I 


If 


on  ras 

tfiia ItBfef  if  from  tmWtioiis  firiettt  of  Tariooi  denominttioM.  Whet 
ihtf  emim  themtelvet  to  their  onlj  sphere  of  nsoAiliiem,  ihey  ara 
HtlMti  fiiiswlt  of  nnnkliid;  whtn  they  depart  from  It,  the  wowt  ty- 
rants of  tho  ikrlieat  tgns  of  Pigarfwn  were  not  more  intoleraiit  than 
they.  A  hyaiit  it  a  lamb,  to  a  minister  of  Christ,  who  caste  off  the 
liTcry  and  the  peaceful  spirit  of  his  master,  and  tarns  round  to  denounce 
■nd  abnse  his  foUow-men  for  obejinf  the  sacred  dictates  of  conscience, 
and  ndbering  to  a  relieion,  which,  no  matter  how  much  persecuted  and 
calnmniateJ,  they  bclicTe  to  he  divine.  I  could  say  much  more  on  this 
snbject,  hut  It  Is  not  the  most  suitable  time. 

The  charge  has  been  made  against  all  denominations,  but  my  oppo- 
nent has  smgled  from  among  them  the  Catholic,  and  made  it  the 
■eape-goal,  to  bear  the  sins  of  all  to  oblivion.  I  must  however  re- 
mind lie  audience  that  the  Methodist  conference,  held,  not  so  many 
yiwn  ago,  at  Baltimore,  denounced  the  Episcopalians,  for  contempla- 
lin#  an  alliance  with  England,  to  subvert  the  liberties  of  this  coun- 
Hy;  and  alleged  what  they  conceived  to  be  no  mean  proof  of  trea 
•onabit  dcrfgns  on  the  part  of  the,  then,  obnoxious  Episcopalians. 
This  prescriptive  spirit  is  is  old  as  Christianity.  History  infonns 
us  that  the  inoffensive  diw^iplesof  Jesus  Christ,  even  in  the  goldea 
iti  of  the  apostles,  were  accused,  mrmeted^  and  put  to  the  most  hoi^ 
tille  death,  precisely  on  the  char||e  of  kaiing  aU  mtmMndr  odio  hu- 
mani  generis  convicti  sunt  TMSitas  Annal.  lib.  xv.  This  celebnip 
ted  historian  terms  the  christians  "sontes,  reos,  novissima  ezcmpim 
meritoB— feriagitia  invisos,"  and  calls  their  relision  itself"  «ntialis 
mperetitio.*'  They  were,  consequently,  dressed  in  ihe  skins  of  wild 
heastft,  and  thns  caricatured,  the  Pagans  set  their  dogs  upon  them. 
Jeans  Christ,  himself,  when  the  Jews  could  convict  him  of  no  cnnae. 


that  moment  the  just  one  sank,  opntemed  beneath  the  malice  and  slan- 
der of  his  enemies !  We,  as  his  disciples,  can  expect  no  better  fate 
than  our  master's.  He  foretold  all  that  now  befolls  us.  "  Blessed 
are  you,**  says  he,  *•  when  men  shall  revile  yon  and  persecute  you, 
wd  apeak  all  manner  of  evil  against  you,  untruly,  for  my  sake :  be  glad 
and  rejoice,  for  your  reward  is  very  great  in  heaven."    St.  Matth. 

V.  11,  It. 

We  have,  the  gentlemaB  iiys,  no  authentic  translation  of  the  scrip- 
litrot.  This  is  not  true.  We  have  a  Latin  translation,  the  vnlgate. 
fhat  Is  one  authentic  translation.  We  have,  moreover,  an  approved 
IMiilaiion  in  the  vemncular,  samdioned  by  all  the  Hshops  In  the 
lliiitcd  States,  and  Ibr  sale  in  eveij  dty  in  the  vni^n.  Bat  if,  by  an 
~  iiMie  bible,  we  mean  one  perMly  Immaculate^  In  point  of  typo- 
»Meni  exeeution  and  nieehanleal  neatness,  I  ask  the  gentleiraB, 
he  pretend  that  any  Protesunt  denomination  has  such  a  one! 
Yet  my  tiiwl  aaya,  MUfiiMiiiiln^  the  fhetn  I  enoted  yesterday 
■Mminf  ,  reapeellnf  a  new  bible,  that  they  have  a  bible  that  is  Mil- 
etentTlf  that  Is  tiie  eaM,  where  Is  the  use  of  a  new  iMtlttioa !   He 


■^B  of  Sixms'  and  Clemeng'a  bible.    That  only^ewe  that  the 
popes  inter  faneht  that  their  personal  opinions  were  to  be  reoeived, 
as  aitieles  of  faith,  as  my  Iriend  would  nereuade  us  they  did.    Pri- 
vate aniwiity  should  Hot  preMme  to  alter  the  authorised  veiaion 
This  was  the  amount  of  the  prohibition. 


BOMAir  CATHOLIC   WCLIGION. 

Kow  to  post  the  books  with  my  Mend  on  the  subject  of  the  bible, 
1  ask  him  if  he  was  not  Infatuated,  for  I  really  cannot  call  it  by  any 
eOier  name,  when  he  said  he  could  show  us  a  bible  never  soiled  by 
the  thumb  of  a  inonk,  and  took  us  right  Into  the  midst  of  twenty  tw« 
monasteries,  on  mount  Athos,/or  the  proof?  Home  in  his  Introduction 
to  the  study  of  the  Bible,  vol.  1.  p.  222,  quotes  Oudin  and  Michaefis, 
for  the  opinion  that  it  was  written  by  an  Aecmet^— and  written  too,  say 
Burber  and  Wctstein,  for  a  chureh  or  a  monastery.  Home  says  the  A«> 
mets  were  a  class  of  monks  In  the  ancient  church,  who  flourished  partic* 
hlarly  in  the  east  in  the  fifth  century.  They  were  so  called,  becauM 
they  had  divine  service  perforated  without  interruption,  in  their 
churches.  They  divided  themselves  into  three  bodies,  each  of  which 
officiated  in  turn,  and  relieved  the  other  so  that  their  churches  were 
never  silent  either  night  or  day.  This  very  Mss.  Codex  Alexandrinus, 
In  the  British  Museum,  contains  a  list  of  the  Psalms  sung  by  these 

monks!  ,      , 

My  friend  says  that  our  getting  the  bible  from  monks,  does  not 
leave  us  beholden  to  them  for  its  spirit.  This  is  a  disingenuous  eva- 
sion. I  did  not  say  that  it  did,  but  this  last  question  belongs  to  quite 
another  category.  My  opponent  says  that  the  bible,  like  the  unlTerse, 
must  testify  to  its  own  divine  origin — ^it  is  the  work  of  God.  In  this 
he  is  completely  at  issue  with  one  of  the  most  enlightened  Protestants 
of  the  day,  bishop  Smith,  of  Kentucky.  «*  These  christians,"  says 
the  bishop,  in  his  review  of  Van  Dyck  on  christian  union,  "  have  done 
well  in  agreeing  upon  those  sound  principles  of  investigation  which 
lead  them  to  substantiaCand  sufficient  agreement,  what  the  canon  of 
scripture  is.  The  principle  is  correct,  and  therefore  all  honest  minds 
rest  satisfied,  in  the  same  results.  Abandon  the  question  of  the  one- 
ness of  the  bible,  to  be  agitated  and  kept  afloat  on  the  perturbed 
ncean  of  expedience,  as  the  question  is,  respecting  the  oneness  of  the 
chureh,  and  very  soon  we  should  have  amongst  us  almost  as  many- 
books  claiming  to  be  bibles,  as  we  have  sects  claiming  to  be  churches. 
4nd  what  are  the  laws  of  evidence,  guided  by  which,  all  christians 
come  to  such  a  desirable  agreement  as  to  the  canon  of  the  scripture  ! 
Do  we  settle  that  grave  point  by  appeals  to  the  scripture  alone  ?  Dn 
we  require  a  »•  thus  saith  the  Lord,"  for  the  admission  of  any  book 
within  the  compass  of  the  bible  1"  Ay,  this  is  the  question,  do  we 
take  up  the  bible  frem  the  shelf,  and  putting  it  to  our  ear,  ask  it  what 
it  has  to  say  for  itself  1  If  we  do,  we  shall  lay  it  aside  without  re- 
ceiving the  desired  answer,  nrettjr  much  as  the  Indian  chief  did,  when 
the  Spanish  missionary  handed  hun  the  good  book.— ♦»  It  says  noth- 
ing," said  the  Indian.  How  then  shall  we  proceed  in  this  investip- 
tionf  *•  We  select,"  says  bishop  Smith,  "  some  period  of  christian 
antiquity  by  univereal  consent  anterior  to  great  corruptions,  and  that 
we  may  be  safe,  anterior  to  great  causes  tending  to  corruption ;  the 
year  300  for  example,  prior  to  the  convereion  of  Constantino ;  or  the 
year  350,  when  the  documents  of  the  then  existing  Christianity  were 
abundant;  or  the  year  200,  when  men  were  living  who  had  conversed 
with  the  disciples  of  John,  and  we  ask,  what  books  were  received  by 
christians,  every  where,  and  with  one  consent,  as  sacred  books;  and 
these,  and  no  others,  we  admit  into  our  canon.  Then  with  the  ut- 
most care  we  look  into  every  previous  writer,  for  concurring  or  for  op- 
posing evidence.  Finding  every  thing  neariy  clear  and  satisfactory^ 
we  repair  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  tl^emselvee  for  acc» 


, 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


289 


■ad  mtenial  eviieiifse,  to  mdmm  ibr  Mid  oonfirm  the  wholes 
And  hf  ro  we  rasi  ratiafied  thtt  we  kaoe  grtuped  the  tbutr/^ 

How  will  tlie  ehanpioii  of  Protestantisin  extricate  himeelf  from 
IMS  dikmBia  I  Does  lie  eonliBM  Ms  igaoniice  of  the  leiding  doctrinee 
of  eminent  Protestant  dtvines  f    Hiqr  ftnd  a  nnanimons  consent. 

lie  talks  of  two  great  lies  I  I  Mice  strong  laaguage,  Imt  ttds  is  soeli 
as  Milton's  Satan  would  Imve  lietter  nsed«  tlian  a  pro^BssIng  ehristiaa. 
Mow  Jews  and  Infidels  wiU  trinmpli,  when  assnied  by  my  opoonent 
that  (/hrist's  preaching  and  miraelee,  so  stgnally  Ihiled,  that  the  largest 
hody  of  christians  in  the  entire  world,  have  been  based  upon  two  great 
lies,  since  the  year  350,  or  aboot  that  neriod!  Take  awayth« 
9,000|<MI0  Catholie  and  Greek  christians  fliat  belieTO  in  these  tw6 
great  Imlla,  and  think  it  blanihemy  to  call  thfim  lies,  and  what  h^ 
comes  of  the  few  strasglen  that  remain  in  the  Tslleys  of  the  Al|is, 
or  where  yon  please— the  "  rmri  tmntti  in  gurgik  mmP^  Did  Christ 
eipend  all  his  labor,  all  his  blood,  to  giro  mankind,  one  kind  of 
'idioiatiy  for  another  !    OmiM  Imdmm* 

liow,  my  friends,  dispossess  yonr  minds  of  pnsludice ;  forget  ^om 
wdimmm  edncation,  if  possible;  take  np  the  Bible,  and  see  if  it  be 
wholly  silent  upon  these  two  great  truikif  not  /i«f.  For  3,  or  300,000,000 
who  hare  not  all  lost  their  reason,  adhere  to  these  divine  doctrines, 
which  they  find  in  this  blessed  ▼olome.  I  speak  onto  you  as  wise 
and  pious  men.  Judge  yon,  youruheB,  and  do  not  let  others  judge  for 
yon,  what  I  say.  I  quote  the  Bible  which  you  all  admit,  as  I  haTO 
hitherto  quoted  Protestant  anthority,  which  |ou  admit  on  all  eases,  to 
be  not  o¥er  friendlv  to  Roman  Catholic  doctrines.  1  disdained  to  avail 
■lyaelf  of  the  wccibisisci  fen  lAreio  ever  your  garden  isdSb,  I  mean  im 
Moral  and  degraded  ministers,  as  my  opponent  has  done  with  discarded 

Iiriests,  to  east  your  doctrine  with  them.  With  sach,  we  hold  no  lei- 
owship.  The  pure  of  lilS^  the  men  of  honor  and  of  learning,  whom 
we  receive  from  your  ranks,  we  cherish.  From  the  Bible,  then,  the 
fathers,  the  most  eminent  Protestants,  I  shall  select  my  proofs,  that, 
00  these  two  in^mied  list,  the  Catholic  church,  like  St.  Paul,  so  Christ 
b  her  witness,  speaks  the  truth  in  righteousness. 

To  begin  from  the  Bible.  If  there  is  a  single  tenet  of  christlaa 
laith,  clearly  established  in  the  Bible,  I  contend  that  it  is  the  real 
presence  of  Jesos  Christ,  in  the  adorable  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist. 
And  If  we  cannot  take  In  the  literal  sense,  the  words  of  Christ, 
**  This  Is  my  body ;  This  Is  my  blood,**  the  plainest  that  God  or  man 
could  utter,  but  must  adopt,  instead  of  tills,  some  one  of  the  two 
Hhumnd  inkmiW  Invent^  by  the  saaamentarians,  and  the  anti- 
sacramenlarians,  for  this  teact.  we  may  bid  adien  to  the  doctrine  of  tha 
intnlliiibility  of  scrlptare.  I  distinguish  two  principal  epochs  in  the 
Goapal  aanaHtes  the  iiat,wlien  Jesus  Christ  promises  to  give  us  hii 
body  and  Mood  in  the  Eucharist;  the  second,  when  he^lwi  them  to 
na.  Before  announcing  his  desire  of  bequeathing  to  the  world  this 
divine  legacy,  as  we  real  in  the  6th  chapter  of  the  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
he  wrougnt  a  splendid  miracle,  even  the  feeding  of  6000,  with  a  few 
Inaves,  in  the  wBdemess,  to  prove  himself  the  God  whom  the  heavens 
apd  the  earth  obey,  and  thus  conciliate  the  &ith  of  the  multitude  in 
tiie  divinity  of  his  mission,  and  the  truth  of  his  doctriiwa.  He  speaka 
of  the  alwnlnte  necessity  of  this  (aith— of  Its  aearcity,  and  expressly 

hefat  ftith.    In  a  wad,  llaf  m  mmmmmmtokim,  unkm 


Utfithir  irmo  him.  He  then  continues  his  divine  inBcruetions,  by 
alluding  to  the  miracle  which  he  had  wrought,  in  which  was  a  most 
striking  resemblance  to  the  greater  miracle  which  he  designed  to 
work,  via.  the  multiplication  of  his  own  body  and  blood,  for  the  daily, 
the  super-substantial  bread,  or  food,  of  men,  with  whom,  as  he  els©, 
where  assures  us,  in  scripture,  it  is  his  delight  to  dwell.  He  renunds 
his  hearers  of  all  the  wonders  wrought  in  their  favor,  in  the  old  Law, 
shews  them  all  the  wisdom,  the  power,  the  love  of  Heaven,  displayed 
in  thftir  behoof,  from  the  commencement  of  their  history ;  how  dear 
Ihey  were  to  God,  and  further  and  better  gifts,  which,  if  want  of  faith  op- 
posed  no  obstacle,  so  many  divine  pledges  gave  them  a  right  to  antici- 
pate. The  greatest  of  Kmgs,  even  Solomon,  in  all  his  glory,  h^ 
nothing  better  to  give  them  toangold  and  silver,  a  city,  a  tract  of  land. 
Ko  earthly  king  can  comjbte  with  God,  in  conferring  benefits.  This 
the  hbtory  of  uie  Jews  sufficienUy  attested ;  and  the  miracle  of  the 
loaves  brought  affectingly  to  their  minds,  what  their  fathers  had  told 
them,  what  they,  themselves,  had  read  in  the  testimony,  of  the  manna 
or  miraculous  bread,  which,  for  so  many  years  had  been  showered 
down  from  heaven,  to  feed  their  ancestors  in  the  desert.  They  were 
thus  prepared  for  all  that  Goo  could  accomplish  to  show  his  excbss  of 
Lovi.  They  whom  his  father  called,  who  are  taught  of  God,  hear  with 
faith ;  they  whom  his  fother  called  not,  hear  with  incredulousness, 
while  he  ttius  announces  At*  own  iotended  benefactions. 

♦*  This  is  the  bread  which  came  down  from  heaven.  If  any  eat  of 
this  bread,  he  shall  live  forever;  and  the  bread  that  I  wUl  give  is  my 
flesh  for  the  life  of  the  worid.  The  Jews  therefore  strove  among 
themselves,  saying,  »*  how  can  this  man  give  us  his  flesh  to  eat ! 
Then  Jesus  said  to  them,  *  Amen,  amen,  I  say  to  you,  except  you  eat 
the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man,  and  drink  his  blood,  you  shall  not  have 
life  in  you.  He  that  eateth  my  flesh,  and  drinketh  my  blood,  hath 
everlasting  life ;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day.  For  my  flesh 
is  meat  indeed;  and  my  blood  is  drink  indeed.  He  that  eateth  my 
flesh,  and  drinketh  my  blood,  abideth  in  me,  and  I  in  him.  As  the 
living  Father  sent  me,  and  I  live  by  the  Father,  so  he  that  eateth  me, 
the  same  also  shall  live  by  me.  This  is  the  bread  that  came  down 
from  Heaven.  Not  as  your  fathers  did  eat  manna  and  are  dead ;  he 
that  eateth  this  bread  shall  live  forever.'  These  thines  he  said,  teach- 
ing in  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum.  Many,  therefore,  of  his  disci- 
ples, hearing  it,  said,  this  is  a  hard  saying,  and  who  can  hear  itl 
But  Jesus  knowing,  in  himself,  that  his  disciples  murmured  at  this, 
said  to  them,  *  doth  this  scandalize  you  ?  If  then,  you  shall  see  tho 
Son  of  man  ascend  up  where  he  was  before  1    It  is  the  spirit  that 

auickeneth ;  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing.    But  there  are  some  of  yo 
lat  believe  not.*    For  Jesus  knew  from  the  beginning,  who  they  wer 
that  did  not  believe,  and  who  he  was  that  would  betray  him.    And  he 
said, » therefore  no  man  can  come  to  me  unless  it  be  given  him  by  my 
Father.'    After  this  many  of  his  disciples  went  back,  and  walked  no 
more  with  him.    Then  Jesus  said  to  the  twelve,  will  you,  also  go 
away!    And  Simon  Peter  answered  him,  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  gol 
thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life,  and  we  have  believed,  and  know 
that  thou  art  the  Chnst,  the  Son  of  God.    Jesus  answered  them, 
♦  have  not  I  chosen  you  twelve,  and  one  of  you  is  a  devil.'    Now  he 
meant  Judas  Iscariot,  the  son  of  Simon,  for  thid  same  was  about  to 
betray  him,  whereas  he  was  one  of  the  twelve." 
z  19 


If 


Mil 

imF  Wn^  ^^ 


BEliATE  ON   THB 


We  liave  here  a  continaous  argument,  and  faith  and  infidelity,  pie- 
tDied  to  the  life;  murmuring  at  impoesibilities  then,  as  weil  ua  utWm 
reliiiked  by  the  Savior,  and  acfiniescence  in  his  word  and  his  love,  bj 
Peter,  as  the  first  belleTer  of  the  dirinity  of  the  Son  or  Goi>-— of  Bii« 
•lAlf  PBEStifoc  In  the  Eucharist.  If  he  spoke  figuratively,  would  hA 
ktve  Mibad  his  disciples,  who  understood  the  rmh'tu^  to  leave  him , 
'ha  who  came  to  save  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel !  Would 
kfi  have  suffered  all  his  disciples  to  |ierish,  rather  than  tell  them  this 
iiiifl»/aef«  that  they  misunderstood  him  !  If  he  spoke  of  a  figurativo 
f nteiMset  ^  words,  **  kow  eon  iftm  Mieve  when  you  me  the  Son  </ 
liHM,  meending  up  to  Hemmn^  wkert  he  was  bdttre**  would  hate  had  no 
mmm.  In  the  Catholic  view  of  the  Kuchanst,  it  is  divinely  strong. 
If  you  cannot  believe,  now,  that  my  flesh  and  blood  are  visible,  p^. 
pable  objects  of  every  sense,  that  1  can  give  them  to  you  for  food, 
how  much  leas  can  you  believe  it,  when  you  see  the  Son  of  .Man  as- 
cending up  to  Heaven,  &c.  The  flesh  surely  profiteth  nothing  to  un- 
derstand this  mystery^it  requires  the  faith  and  the  spirit  of  faith,  to 
impose  silence  on  the  senses,  and  say,  with  St.  Peter,  ^  Lord,  to  whom 
should  we  ft^-Thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life.'*  This  is  the 
hiMd  which  strengthens  us  to  live  out  successive  ages.  This  is  not 
•m  iamiinl  doctrine.  It  elevates  man  to  know  that  he  is  thus  loved. 
Thst  he  Is  of  a  holy  race,  a  purchased  people,  a  royal  priesthood, 
iie  especial  object  of  incessant  wonders.  That  he  beholds  God  with 
Mm^  Imiaiue!,  in  Bethlehem,  home  of  bread,  hid  beneath  the  sacra- 
mental veil,  hut  destined,  and  prepared  by  this  nourishment,  to  enjoy 
him  hereafter,  without  a  veil,  in  the  rieh  effulgence  of  the  beatifie 
liiiiiii*    [Time  expired.] 

Ba^jmd  II  6*clo€k^  J.  M 

lis.  Campbxu.  ris«»— 

My  opponent  in  commencing  observed,  that  almost  the  whole  circle 
of  Cfitholie  tenets  came  in  review  In  my  last  speech.  If  such  be  an 
timr,  wlmse  fhult  is  it  I  I  have  no  respondent.  How  many  hours  hat 
tiM  geitlenM  spent  in  reading  against  time,  without  any  relevancy 
In  the  questions  at  issue,  or  to  the  proposition  before  us.  And 
when  he  does  reply,  it  it  frequently  to  something  said  a  day  or  two  ' 

I  tilieleil  two  points  yesterday  af^moon  as  comprehending  the 
tililiiMn  of  the  error  opposed  in  my  fifth  proposition,  and  even  to  the 
f  ntem  iwiaent  he  has  not  presumed  to  meet  me  on  these  vital  mat 
tan  fo  discuss  them.  In  my  last  speech,  I  therefore  not  only  recapitu- 
lated tome  important  items ;  but  argued  one  or  two  specifications,  io 
proof  of  the  proposition  legally  before  us.  I  also  introduced  in  part  my 
■eventh  proposfaon,  and  so  far  discussed  its  bearings  at  to  show  the 
■itI-American,  and  anti-Repabliean  theories  of  the  Latin  church. 

The  bishop  hat,  indeed,  thit  time,  selected  the  doctrine  of  transuh- 
ttantiation  :  but  has  he  adverted  to  the  various  poinU  of  argument  I 
have  made  !  Ought  he  not,  at  least,  to  have  glanced  at  these  points, 
in  order  1 

1.  The  incongruity  of  the  idea  of  a  sacrament  with  that  of  transuh- 
■nlittion. 

i.  the  unreatootblenest  of  prelerrin.the  literal  to  the  figurative.  In 
the  interpretation  of  a  phrase  common  m  scripture,  which  in  no  other 
ease  Is  so  interpreted  hy  the  party  themselves. 


KOMAN   CATHOLIC    BBLIGION. 


SIfl 


3.  The  arrogance  of  the  priests  in  assuming  the  power  of  woTking 
miracles,  for  the  sake  of  a  forced  interpretation  of  a  phrase  without 
precedent  cr  analogy. 

4.  The  belief  of  such  a  transubstantiation  destroys  the  credibility  of 
nil  testimony,  human  and  divine,  and  necessarily  tends  to  atheism. 

6.  That  the  institution  of  the  supper  is  commemorative  and  not  ex- 
piatory, having  nothing  of  the  nature  of  a  sacrifice  for  sin. 

To  which  of  these  important  considerations  has  the  gentleman  m- 
plied  in  his  last  speech  I  Has  he  formally  and  specifically  met  any 
one  of  them  1 

It  was  also  alleged,  that  the  admission  of  such  a  pretention,  on  the 
part  of  any  priest,  was  debasing  and  paralizing  to  the  human  under- 
standing, and  subjected  to  imposture  and  fraud  those  who  implicitly 
acquiesced  in  it.  There  art  few  persons,  who  so  observantly  trace 
moral  effects  to  their  causes,  as  to  be  able  duly  to  appreciate  how 
much  influence  in  the  formation  of  human  character  may  philosophi- 
cally be  ascribed  to  such  idle,  absurd,  and  irrational  pretensions. 
We  sometimes  see  with  what  little  power,  reason,  philosophy,  and 
experience  combat  the  belief  in  witches,  ghosts,  apparitions,  and 
other  legendary  tales,  the  effect  of  the  nursery  and  eariy  impressions. 
When  the  imagination  is  once  filled  with  such  tales  and  delusions,  it 
requires  a  power  equal  to  the  dispossession  of  demons  to  rectify  it,  and 
elevate  it  above  such  a  tormenting  infatuation. 

The  gentleman,  indeed,  with  a  show  of  respect  for  scripture,  seem- 
ed to  appeal  to  the  6th  chapter  of  John,  as  though  it  spoke  of  the 
tame  thing.  Now,  unless  this  discourse  relates  to  the  last  supper, 
and  was  delivered  with  respect  to  it,  how  idle  to  seek  to  prove  from 
it  what  was  never  said  in  it!  It  was  a  discourse  upon  loaves  and 
manna,  delivered  to  the  people  of  Capernaum  in  their  synagogue,  on 
the  occasion  of  our  Lord  having  fed  five  thousand  men  in  the  desert, 
upon  a  few  loaves  and  fishes.  And  as  at  the  well  of  Jacob  he  spoke 
of  the  waier  of  life ;  so  here,  when  the  miracle  of  loaves  is  the  topic, 
he  speaks  of  the  bread  of  life  .•  and  of  eating  that  bread,  as  to  the  wo- 
man of  Samaria,  he  spoke  of  drinking  that  water.  He  goes  on  to 
speak  fi^  irati  vely  o{ coming  io  him,  eating  him,  never  hungering,  never 
thirstinu  again,  &c.,  and  in  the  most  figurative  style,  continues  his 
discourse,  till  at  last,  after  he  had  spoken  of  their  eating  his  flesh  and 
drinking  his  blood,  he  told  them  that  the  words  he  spoke  "  were  spirit 
and  A/iC"  not  literal  flesh  and  blood — that  flesh  and  blood  could  not 
profit  the  soul.  And  so  the  apostle  Peter  understood  him  when  he 
said,  "  Lord  thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life."  In  metaphori- 
cal language,  it  is  usual  to  say  *  one  hungers  and  thirsts  after  knowl- 
AArro     ^n-Ktaniisnpaa  *  Jtri*.  •  and  ta  Htkv  that  one  eats  what  he  believes 


»uw  •  1MU  «— .«.       -"-  -.-"w -- very  op- 
posite of  the  transubstantiation  before  us.    It  was  flesh  into  bread,  as 


But  the  gentleman  relies  upon  the  Savior's  leaving  them  in  error, 
suffering  them  to  go  away  in  a  mistake.  If  this  were  true ;  I  can  find 
a  similar  case.  To  the  proud  and  captious,  he  often  deioT)ed  no  reply. 
Hence,  when  some  went  away  ftom  his  discourse,  alleging  that  he 


f92  PBBATC   OH   T1IK 

wm  hmn  im  Namntli,  lie  Im^k  no  pains  to  correct  tlm  error,  tlioiigli 
It  wimM  ■eem  tliat  a  tin|i:le  mord  would  have  deeided  the  case,  lie 
knew  what  manner  of  spirit  they  were  of,  and  never  said  once ;  I  was 
not  born  in  Naiarelh ;  but  im  Bethlehem.  But  to  conclude,  the  stib 
ject  of  discusfiion  in  John  vi.  is  about  receivingr  him — coming  to  him 
Mlievinf  hiin  to  be  the  Messiah,  &€.,  and  \¥as  addressed  to  ambitious 
obitinate  Jews.  The  subject  in  Matth.  xxri.  and  1  Cor.  xi.  is  his 
Savior's  death,  sacrifice  and  the  commemoration  of  it,  addressed  to  his 
disciples.  Ii  is,  then,  every  way  illogical  to  reason  from  the  one  to 
the  other,  as  parallel  cases. 

But  I  would  ask,  how  is  a  man  to  believe  the  same  sense  at  one 
liime,  ani  disbelieve  it  at  another,  when  in  readinnr  Paul  or  Matthew 
lit  aeet  the  words,  "  t/m  if  my  body,^^  and  when  looking  on  the  table, 
lie  sees  not  flesh  but  bnaJ,  why  should  he  believe  what  he  sees  in 
Ike  former  case,  and  disbelieve  what  he  sees  in  the  latter  case.  That 
he  feet  bread  is  certain ;  why  not  then  believe  his  eyes  ?  Or,  if  he 
injects  tlMii  here,  why  not  reject  them  there,  on  the  words,  «*  This  is 
my  body!'*  and  believe  that  it  reads,  "  this  tepreunh  my  body !" 
But  even  after  the  consecration,  and  after  Jesus  had  said,  "This  is 
my  blood,"  he  clearly  teaches,  that  he  spoke  in  a  figure :  for,  adds 
he,  **  I  will  not  drink  again  of  this  fruit  tf  the  vine  with  you,"  &c. 
And  Paul,  after  consecration  says,  "  He  that  eateth  lAit  breads  and 
drinketh  lAts  cup  iinworthily"--&c. 

Were  it,  however,  converted  into  flesh,  we  would  have  to  ask, 
wliat  sanctifying  power  in/eM  ?  or,  what  spiritual  food  would  them 
Iw  in  the  human  nesh  of  the  Son  of  God  1  And  were  it  omnipresent, 
how  would  the  eating  of  it  as  a  sin  oflfering,  take  away  sin  from  the 
conscience ! !  The  virtue  was  in  the  altar,  on  which  the  sacrifice 
was  oflTered  :  for  **  it  is  the  altar  that  sanctifies  the  gift,"  And  had 
it  not  been  for  the  true  and  pope?  divinity  of  the  Son  of  God,  his 
llith  as  a  sin  offering,  could  in  no  sense  profit  any  person.     But  the 

Ciiest  can  bfillf  down  the  divine  Savior  from  heaven,  and  oflfer  him, 
ody,  soul,  and  divinity,  as  often  as  he  pleases;  and  have  the  people 
adore  both  him  and  the  miracle  in  his  hand ! !  He  that  can  believe 
all  this,  is  not  to  be  reasoned  with. 

The  gentleman's  remarks  on,  '*  lam  with  you,*^  even  aftei  so  many 
hours'  reflection  since  I  expounded  them,  have  not  the  slightest  refer- 


BOMAR  CATHOLIC   UBLIGION. 


293 


to  any  thing  I  have  said.  I  could  not  have  thought  it  possible 
for  a  child  to  have  to  misunderstood  and  misapplied  them.  I  need 
not  again  repeat  them.  They  are  wholly  misrepresented.  He  has 
•*  deled  heaven  and  earth."  What  a  daring  logician !  Yes ;  he 
**dalied  heaven  and  earth,"  on  what!  To  weaken  his  argument  on 
infallibility !  It  would  be  hard  indeed,  to  weaken  that,  which  has  no 
strength.  Perhaps  he  might  defy  Omnipotence  to  weaken  what  does 
mot  exist.  But  the  bishop  is  just  as  fallible  as  your  humble  servant ; 
and  his  church  (I  may  with  confidence  say)  is  even  more  fallible 
than  the  Protestant  church :  for,  our  rule  of  faith  is  perfect  and  com- 
plete :  his  rule,  as  I  have  shown,  is  imperfect  and  immoral. 

*•  But  Protestants  are  better  than  their  principles !"  Indeed  !  Their 
principles  are  the  bible  alone.  Their  acknowledged  principles,  cer- 
tainly, are  those  to  which- my  friend  refers  !  A  good  argument !  I 
read  the  other  day  something  like  this— >*  Bad  as  human  nature  is, 
Ihare  is  no  man  on  earth  bad  enough  to  make  a  good  papist."  •'  Tbi 
•ystem  cannot  be  carried  out  fully  by  any  prsou."  Would  my  learn 


sd  antagonist  call  this  a  good  argument  against  his  83rstoiii  I  and  iff 
it  not  as  logical  as  that  which  he  has  just  alleged  { 

The  bishop  accuses  Mr.  Smith  of  ingratitude.  I  have  something 
moie  to  do  than  to  defend  Mr.  Smith  from  such  groundless  imputa- 
tions. Every  one  who  abjures  Catholicism,  is  a  wretch :  for  Protest- 
ants are  all  heretics  !  The  best  return  Mr.  Smith  or  any  person  can 
make  for  favors  received,  is  to  disabuse  the  minds  of  his  benefactors 
from  error,  if  they  happen  to  entertain  it.  The  best  and  most  grate- 
ful return  that  I  could  make  to  a  Roman  Catholic  benefactor,  for  any 
benefit  conferred,  would  be,  if  possible,  to  convince  and  save  him  from 
the  most  ruinous  and  destructive  heresy  that  time  records,  or  ever 
will  record. 

Next  comes  the  Seereta  Mtnita ;  for  we  must  circumnavigate  another 
circle  in  this  speech  also.  The  Seereta  Monita,  then,  is  just  as  accu- 
rate and  fair  a  view  of  the  spirit,  design,  and  policies,  of  that  order,  as 
can  be  given.  Such  is  our  faith :  and  that  on  no  mean  testimony 
cither. 

We  shall  give  some  account  of  the  discovery  of  this  said  book : 

"  We  are  indebted  for  this  "  terrible  book"  of  Jesuits* 
•ecret?,  to  the  parliameot  of  Paris.  They  passed  the  act  to  abolish  the  Jesuits 
society  :  and  the  execution  came  on  the  Jesuit  college  tike  a  thunder  stroke. 
Their  palace  was  surrounded  b^  troops,  and  their  papers  and  books,  and  these 
**  Secret  Instructions  '  were  seized  before  they  had  heard  that  the  parliament 
had  taken  up  their  cause!" 

^  The  reasons  which  the  parliament  of  France,  in  1762,  gave  for  ex- 
tirpating this  order,  which  has  thirty-nine  times  been  proscribed,  speak 
volumes : 

**'nie  consequences  of  their  doctrines  destroy  the  law  of  nature:  break  all  the 
bonds  of  civil  societv:  authorizing  l>>ng".  theft,  perjury,  the  utmost  unclcanness, 
murc'er,  and  all  sins!  Their  doctnnes  root  out  all  sentiments  of  humanity:  excite 
rebellion:  root  out  all  religion:  and  substitute  all  sorts  of  superstition,  blasphe^ 
Wiy.  irreligioQ,  idolatry." 

Other  reasons  for  the  suppression  of  this  order,  will  be  found  in  the 
following  extract  from  their  oath : 

**  In  the  presence  of  Almighty  God  and  of  all  the  saints,  to 

you.  my  ghostly  fsther,   I  do  decbu^  that  his  holiness,  pope ,  is  Christ's 

vicar-reneral,  and  the  only  head  of  the  universal  church  throughout  the  earth: 
and  that  br  Tirtue  of  the  keys  g^ven  him  by  my  Savior,  Jesus  Christ,  he  hath 
power  Co  depose  heretical  kings,  priacet,  states,  commonwealths,  and  govern* 
ments:  all  bemg  illegal,  without  his  sacred  confirmation;  and  that  tbe^r  may 
safely  be  destroyed.  Therefore  I,  to  the  utmost  of  my  power,  shall  and  will  da* 
fend  his  doctrine,  aud  his  holiness*  rights  and  customs  against  all  usurpers,"  &c. 

**  I  do  renounce  and  disown  any  allegiance  as  due  to  any  heretical  king, 
princ'e,  state,  named  Protestants,  or  obedience  to  any  of  their  inferior  magistrates, 
or  oflkers.'* 

**I  do  further  promise  and  declare  that  notwithstaodine  F  am  dispensed  with, 
to  assume  any  religion  heretical  for  the  propagation  of  the  mother  church's  in 
lerett. — to  keep  secret  and  private,  all  her  agent's  counsels,"  Ate. 

**  All  which  I,  A.  B.  do  swear  by  the  blessed  Trinity,  and  the  blessed  sacra- 
ment, which  I  am  now  to  receive.  And  I  call  all  the  heavenly  and  glorious 
hosts  above,  to  witness  these  my  real  lA/en/soiM,  to  keep  this  my  oath.  In  tes> 
timony  hereof.  I  take  this  most  blessed  sacrament  of  the  eucharist,  and  set  my 
hand  and  seal." 

Such  is  the  order  of  men  restored  by  Saint  Pius  VII.,  who,  for  re- 
storing them  and  the  inquisition,  ("  the  vice  of  the  dark  ages !  I")  has 
been  mftatified,  and  enrolled  in  the  Roman  heavens,  as  a  saint  of  the 
first  order!  Is  it  not  in  striking  and  thrilling  harmony  with  the  ge- 
nius of  our  institutions,  to  have  priests  of  this  order,  all  over  the  land 


I 


^Mi-apaStii 


IMBATB  ON   THB 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


295 


la  diargo  of  tbe  souls  iid  eoiiieiencea  of  Araeriean  eiliiens  ! !  So 
niiich  for  Jesuitism. 

I  ought  not  to  have  called  ernn  **  Hea,**  i«  the  ipo«tle  John,  and 
tho  other  apoatles,  have  done.  Why  1  All  errors  are  lies ;  and  all 
who  propagate  them  are,  by  the  same  apostle,  John,  called  liars.  "All 
liirs,"  aays  he,  (teachers  of  error,)  shall  have  their  part  in  a  certain 
lakfl.  Was  it  not  impolite  for  the  apostle,  thus  to  use  such  a  vulgar 
■tylel  I  must,  then,  have  fallen  into  had  company,  when  I  said,  tho 
man  of  sin  stands  upon  two  cardinal  lies! 

Next  comes  the  doctrine  of  majorities ;  and  these  are  every  thine 
with  a  Romanist.  The?  are  the  root,  and  reason,  and  ilhisiralion,  and 
proof  of  infallibility.  The  man  who  seeks  the  truth  by  the  tests  of 
■imefity,  majority,  and  anti'iuity,  will  never  find  it  on  earth.  This  is 
wnply  tmo  of  the  present  ard  all  past  ages.  There  are  sincere  Turks, 
Jews,  pgaiis,  Infidels.  There  are  very  ancient  errors,  heresies,  and 
sects.  And,  as  for  majorities,  from  Enoch  till  now,  they  have  gener- 
ally, if  not  always,  been  wrong  in  religion.  Where  was  the  majority, 
when  Noah  was  building  his  ark  !  when  Abraham  forsook  Urr  of  the 
Chaldees?  when  Lot  abandoned  Sodom!  when  Moses  forsook 
Egypt!  when  Elijah  witnessed  against  Ahab  !  when  Daniel  and  bis 
companions  were  captives  in  Babylon  f  when  Malachi  wrote!  when 
the  Baptist  preached  !  when  Christ  was  crucified  !  when  the  apostleSy 
and  many  of  the  first  Christians,  were  persecuted ! ! 

And,  compared  with  paganism,  when  had  Roman  Catholicism  tbe 
inajority  !  Strange,  indeed,  that  infallibility,  afler  all  this,  should 
come  to  be  the  attribute  of  majorities !  But  the  bishop,  in  his  speech 
igainst  Luther,  delivered  here  in  October  last,  said  there  were  one 
liwndred  and  fifiy  million  Roman  Catholics.  I  cannot  find  them  on  the 
earth,  unless  I  count  many  millions  of  atheists  and  pagans  along  with 
them.  But,  after  a  more  accurate  search,  I  find  there  are  in  all,  but 
mm  biiMirad  and  ten  millions  of  professed  Roman  Catholics,  and 
amongst  these,  millions  of  sceptics :  of  Protestants,  there  are  seventy- 
five  millions ;  and  of  the  Greek  church,  above  forty  millions ;  making 
at  least  one  hundred  and  fiAeen  millions  of  Protesters  against  tho 
nail  of  sin.  If,  then,  there  be  anything  in  majorities,  the  Romanists 
lave  it  not.  Infallibility  is  somewhere  else.  The  time  comes,  (and 
may  heaven  speed  its  flight !)  when  the  kin|dom,  and  the  greatness 
of  the  kingdom,  under  the  whole  heaven,  shaU  be  given  to  the  people 
of  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,  when  all  dominions  shall  serve  and 
obej  him.  But  Babylon  mtll  never  see  that  day ;  for  she  will  be 
boned  In  bet  own  ruins  before  it  comes.  And  when  the  angel,  with  the 
Inmpet  of  everlasting  good  news,  shall  sonnd  the  hour  of  her  jodement 
■•come,  and  announce  the  triumph  of  the  gospel  t  then,  but  not  tllltlien, 
will  the  majority  be  on  the  side  of  God,  and  Christ,  and  heaven. 

I  am  oalv  now  at  the  place  where  I  left  off  in  mj  former  speeeh, 
■lid  my  half  hour  is  almost  expired.  I  eannol  again  condeacend  to 
i«ch  a  sacrifice  of  time  to  so  many  points. 

I  was  showing,  when  I  sat  down,  that  the  theory  of  spiritua]  des- 
ptism  always  precedes  the  practical  display  of  it ;  and  that  the  theory 
of  the  terrific  and  appalling  despotism  of  papal  Rome,  is  to  be  found 
In  primelples  and  theories  promolged,  and  believed,  and  taught,  before 
the  reign  of  darkness  and  terror  began. 

The  fict  of  paltiug  the  bible  under  a  bushel,  of  forbidding  the  read- 


Inir  of  it,  of  swearing  for  ever  to  interpret  lim  it  htu  hem  interpreted, 
ofliot  permitting  men  to  think  or  speak  for  themselves  on  religion,  of 
teaching  them  the  power  of  the  priests  to  work  miracles,  to  create  a 
god  out  of  bread,  that  the  people  might  adore  it  and  them,  of  making 
a  supreme  judge  of  controversy  out  of  one  of  the  parties,  or  combining 
the  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  powers  in  one  person,  (the 
model  of  the  most  cruel  despotism,)  is  the  paragon  of  supreme  tyranny, 
never  surpassed,  never  equaled  on  earth. 

How  any  person  can,  from  such  a  system,  elaborate  a  single  ele- 
ment of  free  government,  or  of  civil  liberty,  I  cannot  imagine.   Indeed, 
the  radical  ideas  of  papal  supremacy,  are  as  anupodal  to  republK»n 
doctrine  and  American  institutions,  as  are  the  aenith  and  the  nadir 
But  my  time  has  fled. 

Thifeive  o^ehek,  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises— 

1  have  only  to  stand  here  for  half  a  minute,  and  to  open  the  bible,  to 
reduce  to  dust  the  arguments  which  it  costs  my  opponent  such  a  waste 
of  time  and  labor  to  construct.  Was  not  Civil  and  Ecclesiastical  power 
united  in  the  high  priest,  by  the  Almighty  God,  himselfl  Is  not  Uus  re- 
corded in  Deuteronomy,  and  admitted  by  my  worthy  antagonist !  What 

says  the  scriptore.  .    .    .  .r  ,      ^     • 

••  If  yoa  perceive,  that  there  be  amon^  you,  •  hard  and  doubtral  matter  in 
ittdement,  between  blood  and  blood,  cause  and  cause,  leprosy  and  jeprosv;  nnd 
thou  see  that  the  words  of  ju(1jrment  within  the  gates,  do  vary  ;  ari»e  and  go  up 
to  the  place  which  the  Lortf  thy  God  shall  choose.  And  thou  shalt  come  to  the 
priests  of  the  Levitical  race,  and  to  the  judge  that  shall  be  at  that  time;  and 
then  shalt  ask  of  them,  and  they  rhall  shew  thee  the  truthof  the  ludginent.  And 
Ihou  shalt  do  whatsoever  they  shall  say,  that  preside  in  the  place,  which  the 
Lord  shall  choose,  and  what  they  shall  teach  thee  accord  in-  to  this  law:  and 
thou  shalt  follow  their  sentence,  neither  shalt  thou  decline  to  the  right  hand  noc 
to  the  left  hand.  But  he  that  will  be  proud,  and  refuse  to  obey  the  command- 
ment of  the  priest,  who  niinisteretb  at  that  time  to  the  Lord  God,  and  the  decree 
of  the  jndye.  that  man  shall  die,  and  thou  shalt  tokc  away  the  evil  fipoin  Israel. 
— Dent.  xvil.  «,  rt  i^q.  .       , ,      .    ,    . 

Here  is  civil  power,  and  ecclesiastical  authority  blended  m  one 
ttibiinal,  of  the  presiding  priest  and  of  the  Levitical  ministry,  and  the 
penalty  of  death  ordained  by  God,  against  him  who  contends  for  private 
judffTtient  and  refuses  to  obey. 

Now,  my  friends,  if  Mr.  C.  seriously  intends  t-i  employ  reason  and 
argument,  instead  af  the  calumny  and  abuse  too  oft^n  employed  in  r^ 
ligious  discussions  heretofore,  why  does  he  rake  up  from  a  pile  of 
rubbish,  sad  memorial  of  the  havoc  made  by  the  enemies  of  the  le- 
■nits,  and  exhibit  the  tattered,  and  sordid,  documents  found  there,  for 
woof!  I  expected  "  hofwr  hriM^  from  my  friend,  when  we  began 
&is  debate,  and  I  still  expect  it.  Have  I  not  dealt  fairly  myselfl 
Have  I  gene  to  the  sewers  and  streets,  as  he  has  done  to  those  of  C  racow 
and  Paris  for  the  Seertia  mmta,  for  evidence  agntnst  the  Protestants  1 
No !  I  have  quoted  their  most  respectable  authorities— 1  have  taken  up 
Southey,  and  Waddington,  and  such  writers.  I  do  not  think  it  honor- 
able to  stoop  down,  and  pick  op  from  the  gutter,  all  the  vile  trash,  that 
Protestants  have  written  against  one  another;  much  less  that,  which 
Oie  enemies  of  Protestants  may  have  invented  ;  and  I  do  not  expect 
this  course  from  my  friend,  in  his  attempt  to  fasten  upon  Catholics, the 
sins  which  they  abhor.  *»  Why  did  the  parliament  of  Pans  destroy  the 
society  of  the  Jesuits  1"    I  will  tell  the  genUeman.     Because  they 


V 


WB 


DEBATE  on   TUB 


had  liecoiiie  the  disciples  of  th«  man,  who  boastf^d  that  '*  he  was  tiret?  tf 
mmlmg  it  said,  that  iweke  men  bad  been  able  to  coirrert  the  world  A  .m 
ipigaoism  to  cbristianitjr,  for  that  he  would  let  it  be  seen  that  one  bian 
wis  able  to  onehristianize  it."    This  was  the  boast  of  Voltaire,  who, 
at  Ihe  bead  of  his  letters  to  the  infidel  conspirators  leagfiied  with  him 
afalnst  revelation,  was  accustomed  to  write  the  words ;  "  Ecrasom  Pirn 
JuRe,*'  Ld  m  ermk  fke  wrekkt  meanin|;  Jetos  Christ  and  his  bolj  re 
Igioii.    These  anti-christian  machinations  could  never  succeed,  and 
iMir  authors  were  too  wide  awake  in  their  hostility  to  the  christian 
ililht  lot  to  be  aware  of  the  fact,  as  long  as  relig^ion  eommanded  the 
•ervieea  of  so  learned  and  eiemplary  a  body  of  men  as  the  Jesoite. 
In  &I1  the  entire  world,  in  China  and  in  Frarnse,  in  America  and  in 
Sinope,  society,  as  well  as  pure  religfion  was  their  debtor.    In  every 
lanfoaiire  they  wrote  the  most  admirable  treatises  on  the  mathematics, 
on  medicine,  on  geography.    Their  historians,  orators,  poets,  mission- 
aries, have  never  been  surpassed.     Mr.  Secretary  Cass  and  Richard 
Peters  of  Philadelphia,  recorder  of  the  Supreme  Court,  will  inform 
you,  for  they  have  eiamined  it,  bow  perfectly  accurate  Is  their  map  of 
Lake  Superior  with  its  1500  miles  of  coast,  which  one  or  two  of  these 
fathers,  while  seeking  the  red  man,  for  Jesus  Christ,  in  their  frail 
canoe,  found  time  to  survey.    In  a  word  the  Jesuits  were  omamenta 
to  human  nature,  but  they  had,  at  the  same  time,  the  mitfwium  to  be 
the  ornaments  and  the  |>illars  of  Religion.  This  Voltaire  knew.    His 
laiilel  colleagues  knew  it.    And  as  they  were  conscious  that  the  livet 
if  th«  leeaits  defied  their  malice,  and  the  learning  of  the  Jesuits  would 
©onime  to  confoond  their  sophistry,  they  had  no  resource  but  to  op 
press  them  by  calumny.  Hence  they  spared  no  pains  to  render  them  ob 
■oiions  to  the  Parliament  of  Paris,  and  reprodnoed  the  Seerda  3§miftu 
fabricated  by  some  anonymous  calumniator  in  1612.    The  spurioiisnc ss 
of  this  paper  has  been  every  where  admitted  by  the  critics.     Let  not  any 
one  who  reads  this  controversy  on  the  theatre  of  its  eiposure,  learn 
ftfim  it  that  erudition  and  honor  are  at  so  low  an  ebb  in  the  United 
States,  as  to  admit  as  argument,  an  appeal  to  so  contemptible  a  slander 
^   As  to  the  eeih  of  the  lesaita,  it  is  taken  from  the  same  book  *  There 
m  no  Jesuit  that  ever  takes  such  an  oath.    Every  Jesuit  in  the  United 
ttaiee,  who  is  not  a  native  of  the  country,  and  intends  to  reside  in 
it,  has  taken  the  oath  of  allegianee  to  our  government.    And  in  Georm- 
••wn.  In  the  District  of  Columbia,  in  Virginia,  Maryland,  Kentoeky, 
ape  native  American  Jesuits,  tome  of  the  most  whole-eonled  and  the 
toiigh-goinf  ra|»ablicans  in  the  world,  nrepared,  at  any  moment,  to  imi 
tate  the  fatiiotie  eiample  of  the  first  of  their  older  in  the  United  Stales, 
AplnNahop  Carroll,  the  friend  and  associate  of  Washington.    In  thin 
niflt  they  are  rivaled  by  the  rest  of  our  clergy.    That  venerable 
Id  priest,  now  before  you,  has  done  for  half  a  centary,  and  specially 
In  those  periloos  times  that  tried  men's  souls,  when  a  formidable  ene- 
my was  on  our  frontier,  within  our  bordere— nay  in  onr  very  eapilai, 
and  eommitaing  our  noblest  monuments  to  the  flames,  more  for  freedom, 
lMp|iiness  and  the  union,  than  any  other  living  man,  perhaps,  of  the 
ekfical  profession.    The  Latin  poems,  which  he  published  during  the 
war,  breathing  the  energy  and  spirit  of  the  songs  of  the  Greeks,  when 
they  struck  down  the  tyrants,  were  translated  into  English,  and 
Widely  cireulaled.    General  Harrison,  if  he  were  here  to-day,  would 
tnfoim  yoi,  as  h«  has  informed  me,  by  my  fire-side,  what  loyal  men 


BOMAJf    CATHOLIC    RELIGION. 


397 


Slid  true  n'Cre  the  (Catholic  missionaries  of  Indiana  and  Missouri,  in 
mutd  tang  syne.  How  they  exened  all  their  influence,  and  it  was  not 
inconsiderable,  to  keep  the  Indians  faithful  to  the  cause  of  free  govern- 
ment. My  friends,  if  I  must  have  an  opponent,  let  me  have  an  honorable 
one:  let  me  have  facts  and  proofs,  instead  of  slanders  and  insinuations. 
And,  to  say  all  in  one  word,  in  answer  to  the  charges  against  the 
Jesuits,  Why  did  the  pariiament  of  Paris  restore  the  order  in  France « 
Ay,  that  is  the  question.  I  will  tell  the  gentleman.  Because  they 
discovered  their  blunder,  and  the  injustice  they  had  committed  in  sup- 

Eressing  them,  and  the  prostrate  state  of  education,  after  the  Jesuits 
ad  been  expelled  the  colleges.  Then,  with  the  magnanimity  of  the 
corporation  of  London,  a  few  years  ago,  who  honorably  chipped  off 
the  inscription  from  the  pillar,  which,  like  a  tall  bulli/,  raised  its  head 
mnd  Ued,  by  attributing  the  conflagrat'on  of  1666  to  the  Roman  Catho- 
lies,  did  the  pariiament  of  Paris  make  partial  atonement  for  the  wrong 
done  to  the  Jesuits.  These  are  examples  worthy  of  our  imitation  in  a 
free  and  happy  republic,  where  the  iron  heel  of  religious  bigots  should 
not  bo  allowed  to  bend  so  much  as  a  blade  of  grass  ! 

I  continue  my  argument  for  the  real  presence.  1  shall  first  produce 
the  sequel  of  the  scripture  evidence,  and  then  reply  to  the  objections 
of  my  friend.  The  institution  of  the  eucharist  is  related  by  three 
evangelists,  and  by  St.  Paul ;  by  St.  Matthew,  who  wrote  his  gospel, 
in  India,  seven  years  after  the  death  of  Christ ;  by  St.  Mark,  who 
wrote  his  gospel  in  Rome,  two  years  later,  under  the  direction  of  St. 
Peter ;  by  St.  Luke*,  whose  gospel  was  written  in  the  nineteenth  year 
of  the  Christian  era,  in  Asia;  and  by  St.  Paul,  from  Macedonia,  in 
Greece,  fifty  years  later  than  St.  Matthew,  and  who  had  learned  what 
he  teaches,  not  from  the  other  evangelists,  but  from  the  revelations 
made  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ  in  person ;  all  writing  at  difi*erent 
times,  and  in  different  places,  and  yet  all  using  the  self-same  words, 
the  plainest  in  the  languages  in  which  they  wrote,  or  in  any  other, 
and  the  best  adapted  to  the  poor  and  illiterate,  who  had  the  gospel 
preached  to  them.  All  these  tell  us,  with  one  accord,  in  the  Holf 
Ghost,  that  the  Lord,  the  night  before  he  suffered,  took  bread  into  his 
venerable  and  creating  hands ;  and  lifting  up  his  eyes  to  heaven,  (to 
heaven,  to  show  us  whence  that  power  was  derived,  that  goodness 
emanated,)  he  blessed  and  brake,  and  gave  it  to  his  disciples,  to  whom 
ho  had  made  the  promise  of  his  body,  saying :  "  Take,  and  eat.  This 
M  my  body.'*  In  like  manner,  the  chalice,  saying  :  "  Drink  you  all 
of  this.  This  is  my  blood  of  the  New  TestamenU"  Now,  these 
words  are  so  intelligible,  and  so  clear,  that  if  ever  the  principle, 
that  every  one  can  interpret  the  bible  for  himself,  should  be  admitted, 
and  enforced,  and  insisted  on,  it  is  surely  here ;  for  there  is  scarcely 
a  possibility  that  words  so  plain,  and  so  frequently  repeated  in  their 
plainness,  should  lead  us  into  error.  We  may  even  safely  ask,  in  the 
hypothesis  that  Jesus  Christ  had  really  wished  to  leave  us  his  body 
and  blood  in  the  eucharist,  what  other  words  he  could  have  used,  to 
signify  more  clearly  the  real  presence  in  the  sacrament  I  He  has, 
however,  in  his  incomprehensible  wisdom  and  love,  found  something 
plainer  still;  for  he  not  only  said,  "This  is  my  body,"  but,  as  he 
was  then  making  a  law,  a  will,  where  nothing  should  be  left,  in  the 
slightest  manner,  ambiguous,  he  added,  "This  is  my  body,  which  is 
oivEJf  FOR  YOU,  this  is  my  blood,  which  shall  bk  shkd  roa  rou." 

38 


f98  'IISBATl  Oil  'TH'S 

Wm  it  ft  inifitlf c  body,  tli»l  wai  delivered  for  us  1  Was  il  liy  figu* 
fitlTO  Mooi,  tliit  we  were  ieduwiied  I  Then  are  we  yet  in  our  sioa, 
and  lesiis  Christ  has  deceived  us.  This  it  were,  in  the  last  degree, 
inipioiiB  to  suppose;  and,  therefore,  tieadfasi  in  the  trulh  of  what  the 
Son  of  God  has  done  for  us,  w©  may  say,  as  Terlullian  said,  on  t 
different  occasion,  to  the  innovators  of  his  time :  Under  what  pretence 
do  you  come !  and  why  do  you  remove  the  landmarks.  The  estate  is 
ours :  we  have  the  ancient,  the  firior  possession  of  it :  we  are  tlie 
heirs  of  Jesus  Christ:  he  made  his  will  in  our  favor;  and,  eternal 
piaise  be  given  to  him,  he  himself,  the  oridnal  proprietor,  has  deliy- 
ered  to  us  the  title  deeds  (laying  our  hands  on  the  bible.)  Here  is 
the  pillar,  the  last  anchor  of  our  faith  in  the  eucharist.  But  it  is  not 
jet  eifedient  to  lay  aside  these  lexis,  without  conferring  on  them  one 
meri  of  attention  more.  In  the  twenty-second  chapter  of  8t.  Luke, 
18th,  19th,  and  20lh  verses,  we  read  of  the  institution  of  the  eucharist, 
as  a  sacrament,  and  as  a  sacrifice,  in  a  manner  more  and  more  eipli- 
cit  "This,"  says  the  benefactor  of  the  world,  taking  leave  of  it, 
••  this  is  my  bo^Ij,  which  is  given  for  you ;"  and  in  the  Greek  text  of 
tlie  Epistle  of  St  PftuI  to  the  Corinthians, "  which  is  broken  for  you  :• 
••this  is  the  chalice,  the  New  Testament  in  my  blood,  which  shall  be 
•hed  for  you ;"  and  in  the  Greek  text,  ••  which  is  shed  for  you,  for 
the  remission  of  sins  :  do  this  in  commemoration  of  me."  Here,  then, 
is  every  thinjg  essential  to  a  true  sacrifice,  cleariy  prescribed.  The 
bcead  and  wine  are  changed  into  the  body  and  blood  of  Jesus  Christ, 
teid  iJffered,  and  ordered  to  be  offered  to  his  heavenly  Father,  for  the 
temission  of  sins.  Now,  hear  how  St,  Pnul,  whose  authority,  upon 
what  I  have  already  remarked  of  the  circumstances  in  which  he  was 
called  to  the  apostleship,  is  entitled  to  special  lespect,  speaks  on  this 
fubject,  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians:  "Wherefore,"  says  he, 
•  my  dearly  beloved,  1  speak  to  you  as  to  wise  men ;  judge  ye  your- 
self cs  what  I  say.  The  chalice  of  benediction  which  we  bless. 
Is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  blood  of  Christ !  And  the  bread  which 
we  break,  is  It  not  the  partaking  of  the  body  of  the  Lord!  Behold 
Israel  according  to  the  flesh:  are  not  they  who  eat  of  the  (Papn) 
•acriicet,  partaiers  of  the  altar !  But  the  things  which  the  heathens 
sacrifice,  tney  sacrifice  to  devils,  and  not  to  God.  And  I  would  not 
that  you  should  be  made  partakers  with  devils.  You  cannot  drink  of 
the  chalice  of  the  Lord,  and  the  chalice  of  devils :  you  cannot  be  par- 
takers of  the  table  of  the  Lord,  and  the  table  of  devils."  Who  doee 
not  see.  In  a  text  so  plain,  that  St.  Paul  contrasts  the  table  of  Christ 
with  the  altar  of  the  Jews,  and  the  table  of  devils,  which  the  Gentiles 
f  e^nented.  So  that,  in  the  same  manner  as  the  Jews  partook  of  what  was 
ilftml  on  the  altar,  and  the  Gentiles  of  what  was  placed  on  the  table  af* 
ler  having  been  first  sacrificed  to  the  idols,  so  do  the  Christians  par- 
take  of  the  table  of  the  Lord,  eating  of  that  flesh  which  had  been  offered 
Ik  then,  and  with  whose  blood  they  had  been  sprinkled  and  purified. 
But  this  argument  would  be  weak  and  utterly  inconclusive,  if  the 
iiitlfil,  like  tne  Jews  and  the  Heathens,  were  not  partakers  of  some- 
thinf  leiilly  offered  by  them  in  sacrifice.  Again,  St.  Paul,  not  only 
here,  but  also  in  tiie  Ep.  to  the  Hebrews,  speaks  of  an  altar,  "  of  an 
altar,  whereof  they  have  no  power  to  eat  who  serve  the  Tabernacle." 
Now  It  is  altogetlker  an  abuse  of  terms,  a  wilful  leading  of  othen 
Into  error,  to  cm\  that  an  altar  on  which  sacrifice  ia  never  'UTcred ;  and 
when  St.  Paul  said  we  have  an  altar,  whereof  they  canuot  eat,  who 


■OMAH   CATHOLIC    EELIOION. 


m99 


lemam  attached  to  the  Jewish  religion,  he  meant,  no  doubt  what  was 
tiien  understood  by  every  one,  that  there  was  a  victim  offered  by 
christians  at  that  day,  36  years  after  Christ,  and  eaten  by  priest  and 
people.    This  is  the  victim  of  the  eucharist,  of  which  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke  and  Paul  speak  so  cleariy,  and  so  forcibly,  and  which 
we  must  either  now  admit  on  the  evidence  of  scripture,  or  fling  the 
aacred  volume  into  the  flames.     My  opponent  may  talk  of  Christ's 
saying;  "1  am  the  vine;"  " I  am  the  door;"  "destroy  the  temple;" 
tlMJ  ten  lean  kine,  and  the  ten  years  of  famine ;  but,  my  friends,  does 
■ot  the  scripture  explain  its  meaning,  so  as  to  leave  no  doubt  as  to  the 
sense  of  these,  and  twenty  such  texts  besides.  The  dream  of  Pharaoh, 
and  his   bntler's  were  most  minutely  interpreted  and  perfectly  ex- 
plained.    The  evangelist  expressly  informs  us,  Christ  spoke  of  the 
temple  of  his  body ;  lest  this  expression  should  leave  any  doubt  on 
the  mind  of  the  reader  as  to  the  Savior's  meaning.    But  where  is  the 
parity  between  these  passages  and  the  words  of  Christ :  "this  is  my 
body — this  is  my  blood."    "  My  flesh  is  meat  indeed — ray  blood  is 
drink  indeed."     Our  Lord  does  not  say  of  the  vine,  "  this  vine  shall 
be  hung  up  for  you,"  he  does  not  say  of  the  door,  this  door  shall  be 
hung  up  for  you,  he  does  not  say  of  the  temple,  or  o/  the  vine,  "  they 
shall  be  offered  for  you ;"  but  he  says  all  this  as  I  shall  shew,  when 
I  come  to  speak  of  the  institution  when   speaking  of  the  divine 
food  which  he  gives  us  in  the  Eucharist.     "This  is  my  body  which 
i»  tffered  for  you,  this  is  my  blood,  which  is  shed  for  you"— and  as 
he  was  then  at  the  last  hour  of  his  lifij,  and  speaking  heart  to  heart 
to  his  friends,  it  was  no  time  for  parables  and  figures.    The  traitor 
was  nigh ;  the  hour  was  at  hand,  when  he  was  to  pass  out  of  this 
world  to  the  Father.    He  knew  how  this  doctrine  would  be  contested, 
that  the  vast  majority  of  christians  would  believe  in  it,  as  they  do  at 
this  day,  according  to  the  obvious  and  literal  meaning  of  the  text,  and 
yet  he  speaks  not  one  word  to  induce  us  to  believe  in  a  figurative  pre- 
sence.    Why  T   Because  he  meant  it  to  be  understood  literally,  with 
faith  in  his  almighty  power  and  his  infinite  love.    Because  as  God, 
he  operates  his  gieatest  wonders,  by  the  simplest  words.     "  Let  there 
he  light  i''  ''Thy  son  liveth}''    **  Lazarus,  come  forth  i''  *' I  will,  be 
thou  eldimsed:^^  "  TaAe  up  thy  bed  and  walk;'^  ''Peace!  Be  still i^* 
••  This  day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise ,"  "  This  is  my  bodVf 
tki9  is  my  blood,^'    This  Luther  himself  was  forced  to  admit.     He 
tells  us  now  very  desirous  he  was,  and  how  much  he  labored  to  over- 
throw this  doctrine,  knowing  how  much  he  could,  thereby,  annoy  the 
pope :  *  but,'  says  he,  *  I  found  myself  caught,  without  any  way  of 
escaping ;  for  the  text  of  the  gospel,  was  too  plain  for  me."  Epist. 
ad  Argintenses,  t.  4.  fol.  502.  Ed.  Wittemberg.    In  another  place,  he 
says,  condemning  those  who  denied  the  corporal  presence;  "The 
devil  seems  to  have  mocked  those  to  whom  he  has  suggested  a  heresy 
•o  ridiculous,  and  contrarr  to  scripture,  as  that  of  the  Zuinglians  who 
explained  away  the  words  of  the  institution  in  a  figurative  way." 
He  elsewhere  compares  these  glosses  with  the  following  translation 
of  the  first  wortis  of  the  scripture :    In  prineipio  Deus  creavit  ealum 
d  terram, — In  the  beginning  the  Cuckoo  ate  the  sparrow  and  his  fea- 
thers.    Def.  verb.  Dom.     On  one  occasion  he  calls  those  who  deny 
the  real  and  corporal  presence ;  "  a  damned  sect,  lying  heretics,  bread- 
breakers,  wincMlrinkers,   and    soul-destroyers."      In    parv.    catcch. 
On  other  occasions  he  says,  "  ITiey  are  endeviliaed,  and  superdevi 


BXBATB  ON   IHB 

\im4J*  Ftnlly  he  devotes  them  to  ererlasting  flames,  and  buildn 
his  own  hopes  of  merer  at  the  tribunal  of  Christ,  oo  his  having  with 
all  his  soul^  condemned  Carlostad,  Zuinglius,  and  other  believers  in 
the  aymholieal  presence.  Bishop  BrarahaJl  thus  writes :  **  No  genuine 
ton  of  the  church  ^of  England)  did  ever  deny  a  true,  real  presence. 
Christ  said — m$  i«  my  My, — and  what  he  said  we  steadfastly  be- 
liefe.  He  said  neither  Con,  nor  Sub,  nor  Trams  :  therefore  we  place 
those  among  the  opinions  of  schools,  not  among  articles  of  faith." 
Ana.  to  Miliiiare,  p.  74.  Bishop  Cosin  is  not  less  explicit,  in  favor 
of  the  Catholic  dcctrine.  He  says,  "  It  is  a  monstrous  error  to  deny 
^that  Christ  is  to  be  adored  in  the  Eucharist.  We  confess  the  neces- 
sity of  a  supernatural  and  heavenly  change ;  and  that  the  signs  can- 
not become  sacraments,  but  by  the  infinite  power  of  God.  If  any  one 
make  a  hare  figure  of  the  sacrament,  we  ought  not  to  suffer  him  in 
our  churches."  Hist,  de  Transub.  Lastly  the  profound  Hooker  ex- 
presses himself  thus;  I  wish  men  would  give  themselves  more  to  me- 
ditate in  silence,  on  what  we  have  in  the  sacrament,  and  less  to  dis- 
pute of  (he  manner  how ;  since  we  all  agree  that  Christ,  by  the  sacra- 
ment, doth  really  and  truly  perform  in  us  his  promise,  why  do  we 
vainly  trouble  ourselves  with  so  fierce  contentions  whether  by  con- 
substantiation  or  felse  by  transubstantiation  ?"  Eccles.  Polit.  B.  v,  67. 

My  opponent  says  that  when  we  meditate  any  doctrine,  we  eat  it. 
So,  then,  when  we  meditate  on  hell  we  eat  it  and  all  its  contents !  lie 
iays  we  eat  it  spiritually,  but  this  is  nonsense.  I  want  not  the  sto- 
mach or  the  mind,  such  orthodoxy  requires. 

My  friend  observes,  that  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  is  con- 
trary to  the  testimony  of  our  senses.  We  have  nothing  but  our  sen- 
ses to  guide  us.  This  is  the  scepticism  of  Thomas  Tanew :  **  Uhkm 
I  mail  see  in  kis  hands  the  print  tf  the  nmk^  tmd  put  my  fingers  intn 
ike  place  tf  ike  nails,  andpui  my  hmd  into  kis  side,  I  will  not  believed 
The  Savior  condescended  to  give  the  requisite  proof  of  the  senfios,  to 
the  doubting  apostle,  but  he  replied  to  the  confession  "My  Lor»l  and 
my  God,"  "  Becwise  thou  hast  seen  me,  Thomas,  thou  hast  believed. 

BlISSED  are  TH«Y  that  have  not  SIEN,  AND  HAVE  BELIEVED."     The 

emme^mncea  of  the  doctrine  of  the  real  presence  are  not  unworthy  of 
God.     Every  pretended  absurdity  is  as  justly  chargeable  on  the  In- 
emmmifon  m  on  the  Eucharist.    In  Pope  and  McGuire's  discussion, 
one  of  these  is  to  be  found,  where  my  friend  got  the  foregoing.    It  is 
that  of  a  mouse,  that  it  said  to  have  once  run  away  wiUi  the  sacra- 
™«o\]fWle  the  priest  had  his  eyes  shut  saying  his  prayers.     But  in 
this  ndiculous  story  an  argument !  Then  deny  that  sin  could  be  com- 
mitted, for  sin  is  a  greater  insult  than  this,  to  Jesus  Christ.    Deny 
that  his  sacred  person  was  outraged  with  blows  and  spittle ;  that  he 
wtf  dragged  through  the  streets  o/  Jerusalem,  with  the  halter  of  ig- 
nominy around  his  neck  J  that  he  was  scourged,  crowned  with  thorns, 
craciltod ;  that  his  blood  trickled  to  the  ground ;  that  his  executioners 
trampled  upon  it;  that  insects  and  quadrupeds  partook  of  it!  all  these 
adorable  scandals  are  the  consequences  of  the  infinite  love  with  which 
Jesus  Christ  loved  us.    The  more  he  is  humbled  for  our  sakes,  the 
dearer  should  he  be  to  us.    But  if  the  scandal  of  his  humiliations 
shake  our  faith,  let  the  wisdom  and  the  power  of  the  Godhead,  dis- 
played in  the  midst  of  these  humiliations,  sustain  and  animate  it. 
Behold !  the  earth  that  receives  that  falling  blood,  trembles  to  hei 
very  centre ;  the  sun,  unable  to  behold  the  bloody  tragedy,  withdrtwe 


BOMAN    IJATHOUC    REUGION.  30l 

his  light,  and  leaves  the  world  in  darkness  and  mourning  and  terroi, 
for  its  author^B  dissolution ;  the  rocks  are  rent  asunder;  the  graves 
give  up  their  dead ;  the  pagan  centurion  strikes  his  breast  and  ex- 
claims •»  Truly  this  man  was  the  Son  of  God."  Let  us  also  believe 
and  adore ! — [Time  expired.] 

Three  6'eloek,  P.  Mi 
»Mr.  CampbEIX  rises — 

Knowing,  my  fellow-citizens,  how  much  depends  in  such  a  discus- 
sion, as  that  now  in  progress,  on  having  authentic  documents,  I  deter- 
mined from  the  beginning  to  rely  on  none  which  could,  on  proper  evi- 
dence, or  with  justice  be  repudiated.  I  knew  that  in  all  debates  so  far 
back  as  the  very  era  of  the  Reformation  this  party  have  been  accus- 
tomed to  deny  authorities,  to  dispute  versions,  translations,  &c.  even 
of  their  own  writers  who  were  so  candid  as  to  give  a  tolerably  fair  re- 
presentation of  themselves.  And  as  all  their  historians,  good  and  bad, 
frequently  tell  the  truth,  they  are  all  occasionally  to  be  censured,  when 
that  truth  is  quoted  by  a  Protestant  and  turned  to  its  proper  account. 
I  have  not  then,  to  my  knowledge  or  belief,  introduced  an  unworthy 
author.  And  so  long  as  my  opponent  can  disprove  nothing  which  I 
have  quoted,  either  from  Du  Pin,  or  Ligori,  his  frequent  allusions  to 
them,  with  such  unqualified  censures,  only  shows  how  much  he  feels 
the  truth  of  their  testimony. 

The  Jesuits,  that  standing  army  of  the  pope,  are  revived,  and  are 
Inundating  our  country.  Other  fraternities  are  but  the  militia:  but 
these  are  ihe  trained  band  life-guards  of  the  papacy.  Their  oath  is  full 
proof  of  the  spirit  of  the  corps.  My  worthy  opponent  says,  that  they 
are  a  very  learned  body  of  men,  and  that  he  is  not  now  a  Jesuit.  So 
much  the  worse.  How  then  can  he  defend  the  order  from  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Secreta  Monita  j  and  affirm  that  they  do  not  nrtw  take  the 
oath  which  I  read  to  you  ! — He  would  represent  me  as  picking  out  of 
the  streets,  or  out  of  the  ruins  of  some  fallen  edifice  the  oaths  and 
books  of  the  Jesuits.  If  that  were  the  fact,  would  it  disprove  the  con- 
tents of  these  documents?  It  would  not.  Truth  is  truth,  wherever, 
found,  in  the  street  or  in  a  temple— in  a  cellar,  or  in  a  mountain.  But  I 
did  not  so  seek  or  find  them.  They  are  public  and  authentic  documents, 
and  my  opponentcan  only  deny  or  dispute,  but  he  cannot  disprove  them. 

Here  is  another  document,  not  from  the  ashes  of  a  monastery.  I 
do  not  know  the  writer  of  this  article :  but  it  is  from  an  Encyclopaedia. 

Bishop  Purcell.  Is  it  the  book  of  Fessenden  &  Co.  I 

Mr.  Campbell.  It  is  from  their  press. 

Bishop  Purcell.  Ah  !  i  know  it ! 

Mr.  Campbell  reads: 

*  in  1801  the  society  wai  restored  io  Rusiia  by  the  emperor  Paul;  and  In  1804 
bv  kiiM[  Ferdinand,  iu  Sardinia.  In  Aurvst,  1814,  a  bull  was  issued  by  pop« 
Fiua  VII.  restoring  the  order  to  all  theirfbrnier  privileges,  and  calling  upon  all 
Catholics  to  atford  them  prote<;tion  and  eocouragenient.  This  act  of  their  re- 
vival is  expressed  in  all  the  solemnity  of  the  papal  authority;  and  even  affirmed 
to  be  above  the  recall  or  revision  of  any  judge,  with  whatever  power  he  may  be 
clothed;  but  to  every  enlightened  roind  it  cannot  fail  to  appear  u  a  measure  al- 
together incapable  of  justification,  from  any  thing  either  in  the  history  of  Jeioit- 
iaiu.  or  iu  the  character  of  the  present  times. 

*•  The  essential  principles  of  this  institution  namely,  that  their  order  is  to  be 
ntaintained  at  the  expense  of  society  at  large,  and  that  the  end  sanctifies  the 
means,  are  utterly  incompatible  with  the  welfare  of  any  community  of  men. 
Their  svstem  of  im%  and  pliant  morality,  justifying  every  vice,  and  autborixin^ 


DSIATB  091  THE 


VOM4N   CATHOLIC    ]iliI«iniON. 


Wrs 


«»«ff  alrorit?  hm  left  deep  Mid  iMtinf  «▼•««•  on  this  face  of  th«  moral  world. 

Their  teal  to  extend  the  juritdictioii  of  the  court  of  Rome  oter  erery  ciyiI 

inr  to  tenets  respecting  the  doty  of  opposinc  pnncef 
Catholic  ftiith,  which  sliook  the  basis  of  all  political  al- 


.fovctnnieiit,  .gave  cun«ii< 

wh©  were  hostile  to  the  ( ,  •    • -j    •   •     ui 

icfiaiice,  and  loosened  the  obligations  of  ererir  human  law.  Their  indefatigabla 
industrj,  and  countless  artifices  in  resisting  the  progress  of  the  reformed  reli- 
fiont  perpetuated  the  most  pernicious  errors  of  popery,  and  postponed  the  tri- 
iiiiiph  of  tolerAnt  and  christian  principles.  Whence,  then,  it  may  well  be  asked, 
whence  the  recent  restoratioul  What  long-latent  proof  has  been  discovered  of 
(he  excellence,  or  e*eii  the  expedience,  of  such  an  institution?  The  sentence  of 
theii  al>olition  was  passed  by  me  senates  and  monarchs,  and  statesmen,  and  di- 
TMies,  of  all  nrligions.  and  of  almost  tstery  civilised  country  in  the  world. 

jyuMMt  every  land  has  been  stained  and  torn  by  their  cnmes:  and  almost  eve- 
ry huid  bears  on  its  public  record  the  most  solemn  protests  against  their  exis- 
tence. The  evils  of  Jesuitism  arise  not  from  the  violation  of  the  principles  of 
the  order;  on  the  contrary,  they  are  the  natural  and  necessary  fruits  of  the  sys- 
UMi;  they  are  eoofiued  to  no  age,  place,  or  person;  they  follow  like  the  tail  of 
llw  conit:!,  the  same  disastrous  course  with  the  luminary  itself;  and,  in  cons*- 


rBttce,  not  thb  or  that  nation,  hut  humanity,  is  startled  at  the  re-apnearance  of 
a  conuiion  enemy  of  man."    [Encyclopsedia  of  R«ligious  Knowledge,  p.  685, 

Riniember,  my  friends,  that  one  of  the  cardinal  principles  of  Jesuit- 
ism is,  that  •'  lie  mdmsti/kB  the  iMennt."  This  maiiro  justifies  every 
crime  in  our  criminal  code !  if  th  i  cause  of  the  Roman  church  can  be 
llpreby  promoted. 

The  gentleman  aslceil  **  Why  bas  tbis  order  been  so  often  restored, 
if  it  be  not  food  1"  I  answer.  For  the  same  reason  that  the  Inquisi- 
tion has  been  restored,  and  by  the  same  persons  too.  Whenever  tho 
power  of  the  papacy  and  the  state  of  the  community  would  tolerate  it. 
It  bas  been  revived ;  and  1  presume  so  long  as  the  papaey  livefl«  it 
will,  being  infallible,  pursue  the  same  course.  Does  the  restoration 
of  tlie  lni|uisilioo  prove  it  to  be  good  ! 

The  fenileman  would  trace  to  the  hatred  of  Christianity,  the  oppo- 
sition of  Voltaire  and  other  sceptics  in  France,  to  the  order  of  the  Je* 
•nits.  This  is  a  non  emum.  The  infidels  hated  the  Jesuits,  not  foe 
Chrtst*8  sake,  for  no  one  could  hate  them  on  that  account:  but  because 
they  supported  the  political  desputism  of  this  pretended  vicar  of  Rome. 
This  was  the  true  reason  of  that  mortal  hatred  of  the  Jesuits  by  all 
the  republicanism  of  France,  and  throughout  the  world. 

The  bishop  has  confessed  that  he  would  have  the  legislative,  judi* 
cial,  and  executive  powers  in  the  same  hands,  and  quotes  Deuterono- 
my xvii.  to  prove  that  it  is  right,  even  now.  What  an  admirer  of 
American  institutions !  Certainly,  he  bas  forgotten  himself:  and  the 
Jewish  institution  too!  It  was  a  theocracT.  God  himself  was  law- 
giver—the priests  kept  and  expounded  the  law— the  judges  and  kings 
executed  it.  Where,  then,  were  all  these  powers  accumulated  in  one 
and  the  same  dynasty !  It  is  a  mistake  of  the  case,  as  well  as  of  the 
■Milpe  nf  the  government.  The  very  elements  of  a  just  and  pure  gov- 
•rnment  will  be  found  in  separating  these  powers;  the  very  essence 
(»f  a  despotism  in  uniting  them  in  one  and  the  same  person. 

The  gentleman,  I  am  glad  to  observe,  understands  my  discovery  of 
the  elements  of  all  tyranny  in  the  supreme  judge  of  controversy,  or, 
councils  of  the  Roman  church.  But  he  fails  in  vindicating  it.  The 
MMneil  is  '*  the  church  repreaini&iive  j*^  consequently,  it  is  the  church 
Jidfing  for  herself  against  the  heretics  or  reformers.  She  is  always 
a  party  in  the  case  of  which  she  is  judge.  Most  controversies  are  on 
points  affecting  the  prie»tliood.  All  disputes,  more  or  less  affect  the 
•laiidinn  or  temporal  interest  of  the  clergy.    Now  the  councils  are 


eoaiposed  only  of  clergy.     Is  it  not  then  the  clergy  jndgfing  in  their 
own  case  1     And  socb  is  the  model  o*"  a  Roman  Catholic  Republic ! 

A  word  or  Iwo  more  on  transubstantiation.  Will  the  bishop  please 
inform  us  whtfher  the  bread  ami  wine  are  framubsfanh'afed  info  the 
natural  body  (4  Christ,  or  into  his  glurijied  body?  !f  into  the  natural 
body,  in  which  he  said  "  this  is  my  body, '^  "  this  is  my  blood  i*  of  what 
profit  to  eat  it?  and  how  dare  christians  to  eat  it,  according  to  the  de* 
creesof  the  apostles!  and  iTTit  be  his  glorified  body,  how  can  there  be 
iesh  and  blood  in  it !  for  flesh  and  blood  cannot  inherit  the  kingdom 
of  heaven ! 

The  allusions  of  my  opponent  to  the  Episcopalians  and  Unitarians 
In  vindication  of  his  gross  interpretations  of  the  eucharistal  words,  ia 
unworthy  of  a  serious  reply.  Besides,  their  opinions  are  not  the  sub 
Ject  of  controversy  here.  It  is  transubstantiation.  and  not  consuhsian- 
tiation,  or  any  other  theory  of  the  presence  of  the  Lord  in  this  ordi- 
nance, which  I  assert,  and  which  he  is 'bound  to  defend,  if  he  can. 
The  Episcopalians  would  abhor  the  comments  and  interpretations 
which  the  bishop  dares  append  to  their  words.  He  treats  them  as  he 
treated  Luther  ? 

One  of  the  most  unfortunate  references  I  recollect  to  have  heard  m 
debate,  was  that  of  the  bishop  to  the  unbelief  of  Thomas.  The  Sa- 
vior's answer  to  Thomas  fully  expresses  his  sophistry  on  transubstan- 
tiation :  for  Jesus  said,  **  reach  hither  thy  finorer," — "  handle  me**^ 
•*  thrust  thy  hand  into  my  side."  So  we  reason  :  "  Take  this  loaf  into 
your  hands,  feel  it,  taste  it,  smell  it, — ^Is  it  flesh,  or  is  it  bread  1  Test 
It  by  your  senses.  Believe  not,  contrary  to  your  senses.  Jesus  made 
his  appeal  to  the  senses.  So  do  we.  Why  has  ray  opponent  quoted 
this  passage  1     Is  he  turning  Protestant  1 

I  wish  the  Roman  Catholics  would  hear  Paul  in  this  case.  He  has 
positively  said,  that  it  is  bread  that  is  eaten  in  the  act  of  celebrating 
the  supper.  "As  often,"  says  he,  "  as  you  eat  this  bread,  and  drink 
this  Clip,  you  do  show  forth  the  Lord's  death  till  become."  To  "drink 
m  cup**  is  certainly  a  figure  as  much  as  ♦*  this  is  my  body;"  and  goes 
to  show  that  words  are  not  to  be  taken  literally  in  this  passage.  If 
then,  Jesus  called  it  the  fruit  of  the  vine,  after  consecration,  and  Paul, 
the  bread  and  the  eup,  in  the  very  act  of  communicating,  I  ask,  What 
foundation  is  there  for  the  miracle  of  the  mass  ?! 

My  learned  opponent  tells  you  a  story  about  a  mouse.  It  may,  in- 
deed, have  a  good  argument  in  it ;  but  I  do  not  use  such  arguments, 
on  so  grrave  a  subject.  He  did  it,  he  said,  to  anticipate  me.  He  did 
not  however  anticipate  me :  for  I  had  no  ititention  of  telling  such  a 
tlory,  or  any  other  of  the  same  type.  I  think  it  would  be  more  appo- 
site for  him  to  show  how  a  person  can  believe  against  his  five  senses, 
that  a  priest  can,  by  a  few  words  create  the  body,  soul  and  divinity  ot 
he  Son  of  God  out  of  a  little  " paste  i^*  than  to  relate  such  mouse 
•lories,  how  true  soever  they  ma^  be.  Surely,  before  they  kneel 
down  and  adore  a  wafer,  they  ought  to  be  fully  assured  that  the  priest 
Has  converted  it  into  a  divinity !  , .         j  . . 

I  must  return  to  my  last  proposition.  This  concerns  him  and  his 
oarty  more,  than  any  other  one  of  the  seven.  We  will  soon  be  able 
to  Judge,  whether  be  is  determined  to  evade  or  canvass  it.  I  would 
emphatically  tell  him,  the  community  expect  him  to  discuss  this  sub- 
ject above  all  others.    They  are  much  excited  and  inteiested  ou  ihia 


if"  ™ 

ill' 


BBBATE  OW   THE 

INiiiiL  Mtnir  wtio  litve  no  antipathy  against  RontdO  Cathcli(«a  baf« 
mmm  fearo  of  them.  I  bel<Mif  to  that  class.  I  hare  no  antifMthj :  huf- 
Ihafe  mf  finfSt  I  do  honeeOy  think,  (and  I  avow  it  here,  that  I  may 
plve  my  tngenioua  opponent  an  opportunity  to  remove  theriinpreasioa 
if  he  can.)  I  say,  I  do  sincerely  believe  and  think,  that  Roman  Cath- 
olicism, in  any  country  is  detrimental  to  its  interests  and  prosperity : 
and  in  a  repnhlic,' directly  and  positivel?  lending  every  moment  to  its 
Mhversion.  Such  is  my  conviction.  I  avow  it,  that  if  possible,  it 
may  be  removed*  I  always  distinguish  between  a  system  and  those 
irho  piofett  itr— between  a  creed,  and  the  people.  And  therefore  I 
war  against  pnnctples  and  not  men,  I  am  not  singular  in  th<*.8e  senti* 
ments.  They  are  possessed  by  a  large  portion  of  the  most  intelliffent 
of  this  community.  I  have,  indeed,  been  asked,  perhaps,  a  hundred 
timeSf  aliiee  October  last,  in  different  places,  and  by  different  persona, 
of  all  lelif  ions  parties  and  biiperaons  of  no  sect:  "Are  you  not  afraid 
to  meet  the  Catholics  in  debate?** — Afraid  of  what! — "  Of  your  life 
—of  being  killed,*'  was  the  renly.  **  Are  you  not  afraid  that  they  will 
lay  violent  hands  on  you  !'*  No ;  was  niy  answer.  I  met  the  infidel 
Owen  and  feared  nothing;  and  certainly  I  have  no  more  to  fear  from 
**the  Mother  and  Mistress  of  all  christians"  than  from  infidels  ! 

It  gives  me  pleasure  to  say,  that  there  are  some  Roman  Catholici, 
10  whom  I  could  trust  my  life  and  my  all  as  confidently,  as  to  anj 
Protestant.  To  such  men,  as  Fenelon,  as  Paschal,  as  Kollin,  as  Du 
Pin.  as  St.  Pierre,  as  Thomas  a  Kempis,  I  could  commit  my  life,  as 
freely  and  as  cheerfully  as  to  any  Protestants.  In  such  cases  the  man 
rises  above  the  system.  I  state  ibis  fact  to  interest  my  opponent  in 
discussing  my  aevenih  proposition;  and  to  assure  him  that  it  will  give 
me  pleasoret  ^^^  1  have  no  doubt  the  whole  community,  to  learn  that 
all  such  fears  are  perfectly  groundless;  and  to  see  that  he  is  able  sa- 
islaetorily  to  remove  them.  Let  the  public  mind  be  disabused :  for 
as  present  advis#>d,  Protestants  |enerally  think  that  civil  liberty  and 
the  papacy  are  wholly  incompatible  with  each  other :  and  that  the  in- 
troduction of  large  numbers  of  Roman  Catholics  into  this  community, 
would  inevitably  subvert  this  p^overnraent ;  and  place  us  under  a  spi- 
ritual and  political  despotism,  intolerant  and  cruel  as  those,  which  tna 
see  of  Rome  has  estabiisLed  in  every  country  on  earth,  where  she  has 
obtained  a  majority. 

Let  the  gentleman,  then,  turn  his  attention  to  this  subject,  and  im- 
prove the  opportunity  in  wiping  from  his  escutcheons  those  foul  stains 
that  have  associated  with  the  name  Roman  Catholic  everv  thing  that 
is  intoknmtf  inhuman  abd  tyrannical.  Let  him  show  us  here  in  what 
manner  the  decrees  of  councils,  the  bulls  of  popes,  the  oaths  of  the 
clergy,  and  the  infallibility  of  the  church  are  to  oe  disposed  of,  if  w 
could  promise  ourselves  that  the  prevalence  of  his  party  in  this  conn- 
try  would  not  be  an  end  of  all  those  free  and  equitable  institutions, 
which  have  made  these  United  States  the  wonder  and  the  admiration 
of  the  world. 

Is  it  of  the  essence  of  this  superstition  to  root  out  and  destroy  every 
antagonist  principle,  tenet,  and  party ;  or  is  it  merely  accidental,  that 
Rome  can  endure  no  living  rival  I  Has  not  the  Roman  see  even  when 
a  foreign  empire  always  sought  to  he  above  all  gods  or  magistrates: 
and  does  it  not  now  bind  every  bishop  on  earth  under  the  most  hea»1 
searching  and  conscience  binding  oaths  and  anathemas,  to  defend  and 


SOMAN   CATUOUC    RBLI6I0N. 

keep  the  Roman  papacy,  and  the  roj/ailia  nf  St,  Peter ,  saving  his  own 
order  against  all  men  1  Is  not  my  opponent  thus  sworn  1  Has  he 
not  bound  himself  as  he  shall  answer  to  God  in  the  great  day,  by  the 
most  solemn  imprecations  to  preserve,  defend,  increase  znd  advance  the 
authority  of  his  lord  the  pope,  and  his  successors  canonically  coming 
io  1 — He  has  so  sworn— just  as  certainly,  as  he  has  sworn  »•  to  perteeaU 
mnd  9ppo$e  all  heretics  and  schismatics,"  as  we  read  from  an  oath 
which  he  has  not  yet  had  the  courage  to  deny;  It  is,  indeed,  a  part 
of  the  same  oath. 

It  will  require  the  ingenuity  of  a  Jesuit  to  show  how  these  duties  to 
the  pope  can  consist  with  the  obligaiions  of  the  oath  of  nainraliMtion, 
or  the  duties  which  a  citizen  of  this  country  owes  to  its  government. 
But  before  I  comment  further  on  the  oath,  we  will  hear  it  to  the  end : 

••I  will  come  to  u  council  when  I  am  called,  uolew  I  be  hindered  bjr  a  cano- 
Bical  inipedimenl.     I  will  by  myself  in  person  visit  the  threnholJ  of  the  apostlei 
every  tJiree  years;  and  give  an  account  to  our  Lord  and  his  aforesaid  successors 
of  all  my  pastoral  office,  and  of  all  things  any  wise  belonging  to  the  state  of  ray 
church,  to  the  discipline  of  my  clergy  and  people,  and  lastly  to  the  salvation  of 
•ouls  committed  to  mv  trust;  and  will  diligently  execute  the  apostolic  coniniands. 
And  if  I  be  detained 'by  a  lawful  impediment  I  will  perform  all  things  aforeMid 
by  a  certain  meMtnger  hereto  specially  empowered,  a  member  of  my  chapter, 
or  some  other  ecclesiastical  dignity,  or  else  having  a  parsonage;  or  m  ««»<!" 
of  these,  by  a  priest  of  the  diocese;  or  in  default  of  one  of  the  clergy,  [of  the 
diocese]  by  some  other  secular  or  regular  priest  of  approved  integrity  and  re- 
lirion,  fully  instructed  in  all   things  above  mentioned.     And  such  impediment 
I  will  make  out  by  lawful  proofs  to  be  transmitted  by  the.  aforesaid  messenger  to 
the  cardinal   proponent  of  the  holy  Roman  church  in  the  congregation  of  the 
•acred  council.    The  possessions  belonging  to  my  table,  I  will  neither  sell,  nor 
rive  away,  nor  mortgage,  nor  grant  anew  in  fee,  nor  any  wise  alienate,  no,  not 
•▼en  with  the  consent  of  the  chapter  of  my  church,  without  consulting  the  Ro- 
man Pontiff.     And  if  1  shall  make  any  alienation,  I  will  thereby  incur  the  penal- 
ties  contained  in  a  certain  constitution  put  forth  about  this  matter.     So  help  me 
God  and  these  holy  Gospels  of  God."      Pontif.  Rom.  Antwerp,  Anm  1626— 
pp.  59,  86.    [Time  expired.] 
^^  Hatf  pad  3  o'clock,  P.  M. 

Bishop  runcEu.  rises- 
Mr.  Campbell  begs  me  to  follow  him.  I  am  following  hina ;  but 
Ihe  truth  is  that  my  learned  friend  runs  away  so  fast  from  his  own 
reason,  that  it  is  not  surprising  if  he  gets  ahead  of  mine.  My  friends, 
1  promise  to  satisfy  you  on  the  vital  question  of  civil  liberty.  He 
will  not  be  able  to  draw  me  off  from  my  argument.  He  is  a  foreign- 
er, an  Irishman,  as  well  as  I,  and  I  am  soriy  to  see,  that  while  he 
breathes,  he  would  infect,  the  atmosphere  of  freedom.  We  are  both 
indebted  to  America  for  the  liberty  which  we  enjoy,  which  he  as  a  dis- 
senter, and  1,  as  a  Catholic,  would  not  have  enjoyed  under  the  Pro" 
ieslant  Government  of  Great  Britain,  in  our  native  land.  For  mvself, 
I  am  ?n  adopted  American  citizen,  having  renounced,  by  oath,  all  for- 
eign allegiance.  It  is  my  only  desire  to  live  and  act  as  an  American 
freeman  should,  and  escape  the  charge  which  rests  on  foreigners  like 
my  worthy  opponent,  and  those  Scotch  fanatics  in  New  York,  who 
Tolunteer  to  teach  Americans  how  to  understand  their  own  consti- 
tution. These,  and  their  like,  are  the  men  who  cause  all  the  excite- 
ment about  religion.  They,  and  not  the  Catholics,  are  the  real  mis- 
chief makers.  This,  I  say,  more  in  sorrow  than  in  anger,  and  exclu- 
sively with  the  view  of  doing  justice  to  the  truth.  Let  us  appreciate 
the  blessings  we  here  enjoy,  and  not  withhold,  or  mar  them.  We 
have  not  here  imbibed  the  spirit  of  controversy,  which  may  be  called 
2a2  20 


.APmH  A  I  MM     IFXl       M  J I JB 

iM  tiilrit  of  the  world,  bat  tho  spirit  of  charity  which  is  the  spirit 
of  Ood.    ITic  former  is  predicated  for  another  meridian. 

I  will  mow  finish  mj  ar^ments  on  the  real  presemN!.  St.  Panl, 
•|l«afciiif  of  the  dispositions  with  which  the  Eucharist  was  to  be  re- 
ceiTed,  seals  the  proof  deduced  from  the  words  of  the  institution  and 
the  promise.  His  words  are  these :  ^*  When  you  come  therefore  to- 
fether  into  mm  place,  it  is  not  now  to  eat  the  Lord*s  supper."  The 
apostle  QMiiiiiiMtiieir  partaking  of  this,  as  of  ordinary  food.  "  What,^' 
aays  he,  **  hare  yoo  not  houses  to  eat  and  to  drink  in  !  or  despise  ye 
the  church  of  God ;  and  put  them  to  shame  that  have  not  ?  What 
■ImII  I  say  to  you  I  Do  I  praise  you  !  In  this  I  praise  you  not.  For 
I  hwm  receired  of  the  Lord,  that  which  also,  1  delivered  unto  you, 
that  the  Lord  Jesus,  the  same  nig^ht  in  which  he  was  betrayed,  look 
bread.  And  ^ving  thanks,  broke,  and  said :  •  TVke  ye  and  eat ;  this 
is  my  body  which  shall  be  delivered  for  you ;  this  do  for  a  commemo- 
fation  of  me.'  In  like  manner,  also,  the  chalice,  after  he  had  supped, 
•ayiiig:  *This  chalice  ih  the  New  Testament  in  my  blood;  this  do 
y©  ■■  otkm  as  you  shall  drink  it,  for  the  commemoration  of  me.'  For 
as  oilem  ••  you  shall  eat  this  bread,  and  drink  the  chalice,  you  shall 
•hew  the  death  of  the  Lord,  until  he  come.  Therefore  whosoever 
•hall  eat  this  bread,  or  drink  the  chalice  of  the  Lord  unworthily,  shall 
ii0  giiilty  of  the  body,  and  blood  of  the  Lord.  But  let  a  man  prove 
Uasolf,  and  so  let  him  eat  of  that  bread,  and  drink  of  that  chalice. 
For  h©  that  eateth  and  drinketh  unworthily,  eateth  and  drinketh  judg- 
ment unto  himself,  not  discerning  the  body  of  the  Lord."  Ist.  Kp. 
Cor.  ch,  xi.  Here  the  most  virtuous  and  pious  dispositions  under 
the  dread  penalty,  of  receiving  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  un- 
vorthily,  and  thus  incorporating,  and  making  our  condemnation  a 
imlion  of  our  flesh  and  blood  and  being,  are  required  of  the  Catholic 
eommunicant,  and  yet  my  worthy  opponent  quotes  this  sanctifying 
doctrine  among  the  immoralities  of  the  Catholic  church  ! 

But  my  friend  objects  to  transubstantialion.  Then  let  him  differ 
from  Luther  and  the  Episcopalians,  for  the  real  presence,  without 
Iransiibstantiation,  which  they  teach,  is  a  greater  difficulty.  If  the 
MWe  be  our  guide,  let  us  adhere  to  it  What  was  the  first  miracle 
which  our  Savior  wrought!  Was  it  not  the  changing  of  water  into 
wine  !  transubstantiation  1  My  friend  says  that  he  has  never  read  on 
this  subject,  nor  studied  it.  1  do  not  wonder  that  he  says  it  is  so  ab- 
surd, if  he  never  gave  it  serious  consideration.  (Ma.  Campbkix  here  ex- 
plaineii  that  he  had  said  that  he  had  never  read  a  controversial  treatise 
on  the  subject,  but  affirmed  that  he  had  reflected  on  it,  and  studied  it  ) 
Not  only  the  first  miracle,  but  every  thing  in  nature  confirms  the  doc- 
trine. The  bread  and  meat  that  my  friend  ate,  a  week  ago.  is,  this 
day,  flesh  and  blood  and  bone  of  his  body.  So  of  trees, — the  juices 
they  draw  from  the  soil,  are  converted  into  branches  and  verdure.  Na- 
tmre,  in  fact,  is  replete  with  evidences  illustrative  of  the  possibility 
of  transubstantiation.  If  you  wish  for  a  human  testimony,  interro- 
late  ehristlan  antiauity.  St.  Ignatius,  the  disciple  of  the  apostles, 
ii  his  Epistle  to  the  church  of  Smyrna,  speaking  of  heretics,  says, 
"  They  do  not  admii  of  Eucharists  and  oblations,  because  they  do 
not  believe  the  Eucharist  to  be  the  flesh  of  our  Savior,  Jesus  Christ, 
who  suffered  for  our  sins." 

Origen  says ;  "  Mamia  was  formerly  giTen,  as  a  figure ;  but  now 


ROlffAN  CATHOLIC    RELIOION. 


307 


the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  Son  of  God  are  specifically  given,  and  ara 

real  food." 

St.  Cyril,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  says:  ^  ^.  .  ^,  %  -  ^ 
«  Sioc€  Christ  himself  affirms  thn*  of  the  breiid,  ThM  M  my  fto*r;  wmu  m 
imrine  m  to  doubt  of  ill  and  since  he  affirms,  this  is  my  blood;  who  will  deny 
that  it  is  his  blood  1  At  Cana  in  Gal ilee,  he,  by  an  act  of  hi.  will,  turned  water  into 
wine,  which  reseoiblrs  blood,  and  is  he  then  not  to  be  credited  when  be  «)*nge« 
wine  into  blood  ?  Therefore,  full  of  certainty,  let  us  recede  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ;  for  under  the  form  of  br«ad,  i»  given  to  thee  liis  body,  and  uoder 
the  form  of  wine,  his  blood.'*  ^      ,    . .,  • 

St  Ambrose  thus  argues  with  his  spiritual  children :  , 

-Yott  will  say,  why  do  you  tell  me  that  I  receire  the  body  of  Cbnst, 
when  I  see  quite  another  thingl  We  have  this  point  therefore  to  prove.  How 
Viany  examples  do  we  produce  to  show  you,  that  this  is  not  what  nature  made  it; 
twit  what  the  benediction  has  consecrated  it;  and  that  the  benediction  is  of  greater 
force  than  nature,  because  bv  the  benediction,  nature  itself  is  chanced!  Most  •  cart 
h\*  rod  upon  the  ^ound,  and  it  became  a  serpent;  he  caught  hold  of  theserpent  s  . 
tail,  and  it  recovered  the  nature  of  a  rod.  The  rivers  of  Kpcy pt,  4c.  Thou  hast 
read  of  the  creation  of  the  world:  If  Christ,  by  his  word,  was  able  to  make  some- 
tbinfc  oat  of  nothing,  shall  be  not  be  thought  able  to  change  one  thing  into  another. 

My  friend  spoke  of  the  period  at  which  lhi«  doctrine  was  introduced, 
and  quoted  Scotus.  I  venture  my  life,  that  he  does  not  know  who 
Scotus  was,  or  when  he  lived.  I  ask  my  friend  to  tell  me,  who  is  this 
Scotus,  to  whom  he  referred. 

Mr.  Campbbllw — 1  presume  he  was  a  father  of  the  church. 

Bishop  Purcell.— I  do  not  speak  disrespectfully  of  my  friend,  but 

I  do  not  like  this  index  learning  : 

"  Which  turns  no  student  pale. 
Yet  hoMs  the  eel  of  science  by  the  tail."  ,  ™.  - 
There  were  two  individuals  whom  he  hM  confounded.  The  first, 
called  Scotus  Evigena,  lived  in  the  ninth  century,  and  wrote  a  treatise 
atrainst  the  real  presence,  which  was  condemned  in  many  councils. 
The  second  flourished  in  the  fourteenth  century,  and  taught  theology 
in  Oxford  and  Paris.  Or,  instead  of  either  of  the  foregoing,  does  the 
gentleman  quote  Soto,  the  theologian,  sent  by  Charles  V.  of  Germany, 
tn  the  council  of  Trent!  Of  which  of  them  does  the  genUeman 
•peak  1    I  pause  for  a  reply.  (Pauses.) 

Mr.  Campbell. — You  may  proceed. 

Bishop  Purcell. — I  will  proceed  to  settle  this  point. 

Mr.  Campbell.    That  is  not  the  question  before  us. 

Bishop  Purcell.  Well,  then,  my  friends,  I  will  take  up  the  sub- 
ject of  indulgences,  against  which  my  friend  had  directpd  his  batteries. 
An  indulgence  is  no  license  to  commit  sin.  The  Catholic  church  ana- 
thematizes the  doctrine  that  any  man,  or  set  of  men,  can  grant  a  license 
to  commit  sin.  She  teaches  that  an  indulgence  is  nothing  more  nor 
less  than  a  remission  of  the  temporal  punishment,  which  often  remains 
Attached  to  sin,  after  the  eternal  guilt  has  been  forgiven  to  the  smner, 
on  his  sincere  repentance.  Before  proving  this  doctrine  both  scriptural 
and  rational,  and  that  the  church  is  guilty  of  encouraging  no  immora- 
lity  by  the  power  which  she  exercises  in  the  granting  of  indulgences,! 
must  shew  that  the  charge  of  immorality  presses  heavily  on  my  oppo- 
nent's doctrine,  and  not  on  mine,  for  he  teaches  that  the  distinction  be- 
tween crreater  and  lesser  sins  is  not  found  in  scripture.  He  has  advo- 
cated the  monstrous,  and  insupportable  doctrine,  that  the  child  who 
tells  an  untruth,  to  save  itself  from  punishment,  is  as  guilty  as  the 
parricide  who  cuts  his  father's  throat!  and  accuses  Catholics  of  being 


« 


m 


't 


30i  DIBATI  OH  TBS 

inmnnlf  ttoraate  ihej  do  not  subscribe  to  sneh  a  doctrine  as  tbitt 
Wint  it  tli«  tiect  of  this  doctrine,  that  all  sins  are  equal  ?  Wh j,  i| 
m  this :  thai  the  man  who  has  coroniilted  the  sii^^htest  ain,  is  as  guilty 
i»  Ilia  aigbt  of  God,  and  as  desenring  of  being  damned,  as  if  his  sina 
««n  ever  so  enormons.  ••  If  this  he  my  lot,"  Is  hit  spontaneous  rea- 
soffling,  «•  I  see  no  cause  whj  tot  passions  should  not  hsTe  all  the  ad 
vanlap  of  this  doctrine.  I  will,  therefore,  continin  to  sin.  No  na- 
tiial  JaWt  no  divine  legislation,  no  civil  conyention,  or  moral  restraint, 
ahalt  debar  me  of  my  pleasures.'*  This  is  revolting ;  it  is  horrible 
Siiiptafe,  reason,  and  Catholicism,  anathematize  It.  I  now  resnme 
heproof  of  mj  position,  touching  indulgences,  and  maintain  thatafWi 
the  eternal  guilt  is  remitted,  a  temporal  pain  is  often  inflicted  for  the 
aatiafaction  of  divine  justice.  Thus,  when  Adam  and  Eve  had  sinned 
ii  pafadise,  when  they  had  incurred  the  Divine  displeasure,  and  heard 
the  dread  sentence  pronounced  against  them  and  their  posterity,  even 
in  his  wrath  the  Almighty  remembered  mercy.  They  were  driven 
ffoni  Eden,  but  not  into  hell.  In  other  words,  the  eternal  guilt  of  their 
ail  vat  fofffiven,  but  the  temporal  punishment  still  remained  to  be 
MdllfBd.  (There  is  some  doubt  whether  Eve  partakes  of  her  consort'p 
iMpillMta  in  heaven,  or  not;  but  Adam,  we  arc  assured  by  scripture 
It  la  heaven.)  "  In  the  sweat  of  thy  brow  shalt  thou  eat  thy  bread,' 
aaid  the  Lord,  "the  earth  shall  be  accursed  in  thy  toil,  briars  and 
tinima,*»  lie.  We  are  bearing  a  part  of  their  pnnishment.  We  feel 
th®  effects  of  this  primeval  prevarication.  The  whole  earth  is  a  hospi 
td.  Poverty,  crime,  disease,  war,  pestilence,  and  famine ;  physical 
nrnly  aad  neital  afflictions,  and  evils;  all  the  quarreling;  all  tha 
diiamiiees  of  opinion;  this  very  controversy;  all  this  Is  a  part  of 
tie  temporal  punishment  of  our  first  parents'  transgression.  This 
•hewa  the  difference  between  the  temporal  and  eternal  punishment  of 
ain.  Behold  another  Illustration.  David  takes  Uriah's  wife— he  orderi 
Uriah  into  the  front  of  the  battle  that  he  might  be  killed.  The  Al 
imi|hty,  incensed  at  his  double  crime,  sends  his  prophet  to  rebuke  him, 
aiM  Havid  trembles  before  his  wrath.  God  is  moved,  and  pardons 
llliii.  Me  remits  the  eternal  guilt  of  his  sin,  bnt  not  its  tempoial  punish- 
ment "The  child  that  is  born  for  thee  shall  die.*'  We  know  all  the 
evils  that  followed ;  Absalom,  &c.  The  doctrine  of  indulgences  is  this : 

WHIM  A  HUMAH  BKIKG  DOES   EViaV   THIKO   US  HIS  POWER  TO  ATGTIt  ro* 

811,  God  has  left  a  power  in  the  chnrch,  to  remit  a  part  or  the  entire  ot* 
the  tomporal  pnniahment  doe  to  it.  It  is  always  understood,  that  a: 
malter  what  the  chnrch  does,  the  indnlgence  is  of  no  effect,  if  the  *i» 
peiitance  be  not  sincere.  I  will  give  yoo  a  striking  eiample  frois 
^''jf  *"."*•  ^'  '*  **^®  *^^^®  where  St.  Pin!  absolved  the  incestuous  mat 
of  Corinth,  2d  Cor.  11.  6,  8,  who  had  been  guilty,  even  in  the  eariy  agf 

^^1*?^.*'*'"'^'*'  ^^  "  *^""***  *^'*'^  •*"'®*^  •"*  ^^^  ^^  ■"  ***®  church 
with  dismay.   St.  Paul  wrote  to  Corinth  and  aaid,  when  he  heard  that 

lii  man  waa  overwhelmed  with  contrition,  and  shunned  by  all  the 

ftople,  "To  him  that  is  such  a  one  this  rebuke  is  sufficient,  that  ia 

iftaby  many.    And  to  whom  you  have  pardoned  anything,  I  also 

or  what!  have  pardoned,  if  I  have  pardoned  any  thing,  for  yoursakes 

have  1  done  it  in  the  person  of  Christ."    One  teit  is  worth  twenty 

■rgoments.    The  obedience  rendered  to  St.  Paul  on  this  occasion,  by 

the  eimpeh  of  Corinth,  my  friend  denonneea.    But  the  eariy  christians 

wei«  amu  humble,  and  Paul  waa  guilty  of  do  assumption  in  demand 


S03IAK   CATHOUC    RELIGION. 


309 


tng  It.  "In  the  person  of  Christ,"— mark  those  words— that  he,  in 
the  person  of  Chnsi,  forgave— what  1— not  the  eternal  guilt  of  the  in- 
cestuous man— God  alone  could  forgive  that ;  hut  the  temporal  punish- 
ment;  to  restore  him  to  the  privile^  of  the  church  and  of  christian 
society.  Nothing  is  more  frequent  m  the  ecclesiastical  history  of  the 
early  ages,  than  the  narrative  of  the  acts  of  the  martyrs ;  and  this, 
among  others,  of  their  being  visited  in  prison,  or  met  in  their  way  to 
execution,  by  persons  condemned  to  perform  public  penances,  accord- 
ing to  the  discipline  of  the  church  in  those  days,  and  supplicated  for  a 
ticket,  or  other  intimation  of  intercession  in  their  behalf,  with  the  pas- 
tors of  the  church,  that  the  terra  of  these  penances  might  be  abridged. 
Id  consideration  of  the  martyr's  generous  sacrifices.  One  drop  of 
Christ's  precious  blood  was  sufficient  to  ransom  a  thousand  worids. 
He  left  this  treasure  and  its  keys  to  the  church,  saying,  »*  Whatever 
you  shall  loose  on  earth,  it  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven,"  &c.  But  I  will 
give  you  other  examples  to  Illustrate  the  doctrine  of  indulgences.  The 
English  church  grants  indulgences.  Luther  granted  them,  of  an  extra- 
ordmary  kind  too.  Our  government  grants  Indulgences.  An  insolvent 
debtor  hangs  his  head  with  shame ;  there  is  nothing  he  would  not  do 
to  pay  his  debts.  The  law  takes  him  to  jail— he  gives  a  schedule  of 
his  property,  and  upon  surrendering  all  he  possesses  in  the  world,  upon 
oath,  he  is  allowed  to  take  the  benefit  of  the  act.  This  is  what  the 
church  does  to  sinners,  who  sincerely  repent  and  do  all  they  can,  first, 
to  pay  the  spiritual  debts  that  stand  against  them.  Shew  me  that  there 
is  anything  wrong  In  the  Insolvent  laws,  and  then  you  may  find  fault 
with  the  practice  of  the  church.  As  for  the  pope,  or  bishop,  giving  a 
license  to  sin,  I  will  repeat  as  often  as  it  Is  repeated,  that  the  Catholic 
church  reprobates  it.  If  all  the  bishops  in  the  worid,  and  the  pope 
were  to  sign  such  a  license,  the  sinner  would  not  be  forgiven,  if  he  re- 
mained in  sin.  God  himself  does  not  pardon  sin  upon  thi^se  terms. 
But  I  cannot  consent  that  the  gentleman  should  force  down  oui  Ibroate 
doctrines  that  we  abominate. — [Time  expired.] 

JRwr  o'c/ocA,  P.  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  n%*^— 

Really,  my  friends,  it  would  seem  as  if  I  on^ht  to  go  back  some 
two  or  three  days  to  help  my  opponent  forward  to  the  subject  now 
before  us.  But  I  will  not.  There  is  no  person  in  this  house,  with 
the  exception  of  my  ingenious  opponent,  who  believes  that  I  repre- 
sent all  sins  as  equal  as  respects  man.  Though  as  respects  the  di- 
vine law,  as  already  observed,  they  are  equally  transgressions  of  it. 
Ilence,  as  James  the  apostle  avers  :  **  He  that  offends  in  >me  poini,^^ 
though  he  should  keep  every  other,  "  is  guilty  vf  alV!  The  gentle- 
man, then,  may  defend  his  "  white  lies,"  and  other  violations  of  God's 
law,  as  he  pleases ;  but  God  will  show  the  universe  that,  as  respects 
his  character,  as  Lawgiver  and  King,  the  least  Infraction,  as  respects 
man,  ia  the  highest  insult  that  can  be  rendered  to  the  Lawgiver. 
Eve's  **  little  sin,"  as  the  infidels  call  it,  is  the  best  exposition  of  the 
logic  of  Roman  theology.  Though  it  differs  much  in  the  estimation 
of  man  from  the  treachery  of  Judas :  yet,  does  not  every  page  and 
letter  in  man's  sad  history,  bear  witness,  that  even  the  pulling  off  an 
apple  against  the  law  of  God,  is  an  offence  that  justifies  the  Gover- 
nor of  the  Universe  for  having  suffered  the  while  creation  on  our 


DEBATE   031  THE 

planet  to  gnmii  and  travail  logether  in  pain  and  deadi  for  thousands  of 

To  tbo  anpropittous  destiny  of  my  opponent  I  attribute  all  lits  ro- 
marks  on  my  saying  that  I  read  no  tracts  in  confutaUon  of  transub* 
■lanllation.  Does  uiat  prove  that  I  cannot  refute — or  that  I  have  not 
refuted  his  defence  of  it.  The  bible  alone  qualifies  me  to  expose  all 
his  sophistry,  or  that  of  any  man,  on  that  grossest  and  most  un- 
feasible of  all  the  impostures  that  have,  in  any  age  or  nation,  been 
obtntded  on  mankind. 

The  gentleman  has  spoken  of  various  natural  transnbstantiations 
Astonishing!  Who  ever  thought  any  thinff  else,  but  that  all  organi* 
led  bodies,  all  earthly  substances,  nay,  indeed,  that  all  matter  was 
•Uiceptible  of  real  changes,  and  new  combinations  and  transubstanti- 
•tioiisl  Bnt  where  is  the  analogy!  They  are  real  and  apparent, 
visible  and  sensible  transubstantiations.  But  the  universe  affords 
no  transttbstantiation,  similar  to  that  for  which  the  Bishop  contends— 
Nothing  transubstantiated,  and  yet  the  same  to  all  our  sense  and 


SOMAN   CATHOMC    BSLIOION. 


Sill 


But  in  the  name  of  reason  itself,  what  distress  or  pressare  of  mis- 
fortune has  induced  this  learned  gentleman  to  appeal  to  the  miracle 
in  Cana  of  Gali!ee-»to  the  transubstantiation  of  water  into  wine  I  That 
was  really  a  transubstantiation.  It  did  not  look  like  water — ^laste 
like  water,  smell  like  water,  nor  operate  like  water.  It  was  real  wine, 
in  color,  taste,  smell,  and  all  its  sensible  properties.  What  a  refuta- 
tion has  the  gentleman  found  in  his  own  illustration  ! ! 

The  Bishop's  remarks  upon  **  eating  the  ivord,'*^  &c.  &cn  are  equal- 
ly unhappy,  and  extrava^nt.  He  has  not  done  himself  any  honor  on 
this  occasion.  Jesus  said,  ^*  it  is  my  meat  and  my  drink  to  do  the 
will  of  him  that  sent  me."  Truth  is  an  aliment  of  the  soul,  and  do- 
ing the  will  of  heaven  is  n  feast  to  every  christian.  But  can  the  soul 
feast  on  literal  flesh  and  blood  I !    'Tis  an  outrage  on  common  sense ! 

I  was  flad  to  hear  him  even  quote  the  words,  "  Jud&re  you  what  I 
say:"  any  appeal  to  reason,  any  Vord  favorable  to  exaiEiation,  com- 
ing  from  that  quarter,  falls  on  my  ear  like  the  sound  of  the  dulci- 
iner.  Jesus  says,  *'  Why  do  you  not  of  yourselves  judge  what  is 
rifht;*'  and  Paul  says,  **  Judge  what  I  say;*'  and  John  commands, 
"Believe  not  every  spirit;  but  try  the  spirits,  for  many  false  prophets 
are  gone  forth  into  the  world.**  Now  all  these  commands  are  address- 
ed to  the  common  mass  of  christians.  Well,  then,  says  Paul,  **  The 
lot^  for  which  we  give  thanks,  is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  body  of 
Christ,"  &c. ;  "  and  the  cup  which  we  bless,  is  it  not  the  communion 
of  the  blood  !**  &c. :  and  the  whole  is  called  the  Lord*8  table,  the 
Lord*s  snpper--an  institution  in  remembrance  of  one  that  is  absent, 
••  TILL  HI  com  :** — not  the  eating  of  one  present,  but  the  memorial 
of  one  absent.  "  You  then,**  says  Paul,  "  do  show  forth  the  Lord*s 
death  iiil  Ae  eofiic.** 

The  Corinthian  abuses  show,  that  they  had  no  notion  of  a  wafer 
and  no  wine — of  a  mass,  a  transubstantiation.  Paul  reproved  them 
for  their  irregularities,  and  said  this  was  not  to  eat  the  LtmPi  supper^ 
(not  to  partake  of  a  mass)  :  for  some  had  eaten  and  even  drunk  to  excess. 
The  nch  had  brought  a  large  supper,  and  put  the  poor  to  shame,  who 
had  no  supper  to  bring,  'fhese  were  abuses  which  could  never  have 
arisen  cmt  of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  In  one  word,  there 
transubstantiation  in  the  passover,  because  il  is  called  the 


"  Lord's  passover,"  as  there  is  in  the  institution  of  the  supper,  be- 
cause it  is  called  the  "  Lord's  body :"  and  he  that  cannot  thus  "  dis- 
eem  the  Lord*8  body,"  in  this  institution,  is  not  to  be  reasoned  with 
on  any  religious  question.  .     •  j      -i.      • 

Next  comes  the  gentleman*s  splendid  episode  on  the  identification 
of  the  unfortunate  ScottiSj  whose  peculiar  age  and  country  I  am  no 
more  bound  to  remember,  or  to  tell  here,  than  I  am  to  relate  the  per- 
sonal or  family  history  of  every  individual  I  quote.  How  many  au- 
thors are  daily  quoted,  whose  age  and  country,  not  one  in  a  hundred, 
may  be  able  to  relate  with  historic  accuracy !  Are  those  who  cite  Co- 
pernicus, Zoroaster,  Euclid,  or  even  Newton,  obliged  to  tell  when  or 
where  they  were  born,  lived  and  died  ?  It  is,  however,  on  the  au- 
thority of  Bellarmine  I  quoted  this  celebrated  Roman  Catholic  au- 
thor, and  ought  I  not,  on  such  an  endorsement,  to  regard  Scotus  as  of 
high  authority  in  the  Roman  church  1 

Time  is  becoming  very  precious,  and  as  I  have  only  two  speeches 
after  to-day,  I  shall  not  go  farther  into  the  details  of  the  proposition, 
now  under  discussion,  especially  as  I  have  not  been  met  by  the  Bish- 
op on  the  two  grand  errore  which  nourish  and  sustain  the  baseless 
dream  of  purgatory  and  the  sacraments  of  penance,  auricular  confes- 
sion, the  mass,  &c.  &c. 

Indulgence  is  not  identical  with  absolution,  as  my  opponent  seems 
to  argue.  Indulgence,  as  the  term  imports,  is  a  licence  to  sin  :  abso- 
luUon  is  the  forgiveness  of  sin.  An  indulffence  gives  licence  to  sin, 
because  it  promises  the  person  prospectively  an  exemption  from  the 
punishment;  and  even  to  remain,  in  full  force,  in  the  moment  of 
death ! 

My  seventh  proposition  says: 

"The  Roman  Catholic  religion,  if  infallible  and  insutreptible  of  reformntion 
ns  alleged,  19  essentiallv  anti-American,  being  opposed  to  the  genius  of  all  frea 
institations,  and  positively  subversive  of  them,  opposing  the  general   reading  of 
the  scriptures,  and  the  difl'usion  of  useful  knowrledge  among  the  whole  coiumu- 
nitj,  so  essential  to  liberty  and  the  permanency  of  good  government. 

"Essentially  anti-American."— This  I  have  so  far  proved,  as  refer- 
ence  has  already  been  made  to  those  doctrines,  which  make  the  Roman 
Catholic  population  abject  slaves  to  their  priests,  bishops,  and  popes— 
to  that  hierarchy,  which  has  always  opposed  freedom  of  thought,  of 
speech,  and  of  action,  whether  in  literature,  politics,  or  religion.  Such 
are  the  laws  of  mind— such  the  intellectual  and  moral  constitution  of 
man,  that  if  in  religion  the  mind  be  enslaved  to  any  superstition,  espe- 
cially in  youth,  it  rarely  or  ever  can  be  emancipated  and  invigorated. 
The  benumbing  and  paralizing  influence  of  Romanism  is  such,  as  to 
disqualify  a  person  for  the  relish  and  enjoyment  of  political  liberty. 
For  in  all  history,  civil  liberty  follows  in  the  wake  of  religious  liberty ; 
insomuch,  that  it  is  almost  an  oracle  of  philosophy,  that  religious  liberty 
is  the  cause,  and  political  liberty  an  effect  of  that  cause,  without 
which  it  never  has  been  found.  Compare  not  Protestant  America  with 
the  republics  of  Greece  or  Rome;  for  there  is  scarcely  any  point  of 
coincidence  in  this  respect.  There  never  was  on  earth  so  free  and  so 
equitable  an  institution  as  the  Protestant  institutions  of  these  United 

States 

We'shall  now  exemplify  the  spirit  and  tendency  of  Romanism,  taken 
from  the  five  hundred  years  in  which  it  was  most  triumphant. 

Ae  t  apeeimon  of  that  abject  slavery  of  Romanists  to  their  superiors. 


312 


uniATi  OR'  ms 


■ml  of  iie  homiliiT  of  the  popeti  of  which  my  friend  has  so  often 

indkiiii,  take  <he  followinpr  example. 

*•  Accordiof  to  this  dortrine  tbeo  current  at  Roin«,  in  the  last  L«t«T»n  great 
ttnod.  under  ihc  Pope's  noie,  and  in  hit  car,  one  biihop  tUlad  him  Prtnee  of 
lb  worUt  another  orator  called  hitn  King  of  kinjr*,  and  Monarch  of  the  earth; 
aailihcr  i^eat  prelate  said  of  him,  that  he  had  tdl  power  mhove  mil  powtrw, 
ftufft  ^  heatm  and  earth.  And  the  saine  roused  up  Pope  Leo  X.  in  thete  hrara 
teffaa:  **  Snatch  up  therefore  the  two-edged  sword  of  divine  power,  committed  to 
IhM;  Hid  anjoin.  command,  and  charge,  that  an  universal  peace  and  alliance  b« 
made  among  christians  tor  at  least  ten  years;  and  to  that  bmd  kmgs  in  fetters 
of  the  great  king,  and  constrain  noble*  bj  the  iron  manacles  of  censures:  for 
to  thee  IS  gt»«B  all  power  in  hearen  and  in  earth." 

••This  b  I  he  doctrine  which  Barronius.  with  a  Roman  confidenc*»,doth  »o  often 
•fsert  and  dfita  forward,  saying:,  "  that  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  it, but  that  th« 
cWI  Jiriiid^aWy  >>  subject  td  the  sacerdotal:  and  that  God  hath  maHe  the  poll- 
Ifeal  gof«filiiieBt  subject  to  the  dominion  of  the  spiritual  church."  Epis.  Patrac. 
Sesi.  10,  p.  133.     Barronius,  Annal«,  57.  23. 

It  is  Barronias,  and  not  Du  Pin,  says,  "  that  God  ha»  made  fhepoH" 
Uml  gmernmeni  mtbjeei  to  ike  tpirituaiy  This  is  the  true  doctrine  of 
popery.    But  we  shall  hear  another  great  cardinal. 

Again  Bellamiiiie  says;  ••By  reason  of  the  spiritual  power,  the  pope,  at  least 
indirectly,  hath  a  supreme  power  even  in  temprnral  matlers." 

CoMeming  which,  Dr.  Banow  rightly  observes,  "If  the  pope  may 

•trllce  princes,  it  matters  not  much  whether  it  be  by  a  downright  blow 

or  slailingly." 

We  shall  now  very  hastily  ran  hack  ftom  A.  D.  1585  to  730,  and 
give  a  few  specimens  of  the  trae  spirit,  and  tone,  and  action,  of  this 

lostitntion,  during  its  ascendency. 

A.  D.15»5.  "Tiie  bull  o(  Pope  Sixtus  V.  apinst  llu  two  wm  afwmth, 
Henry,  King  of  Natarre.  and  the  Prince  of  Contft,  beginneth  thus:  'The  au- 
thority gi»en  to  St.  Peter  and  his  succesttors,  by  the  immense  power  of  the  eter* 
ail  kiag.  eicela  all  the  powers  of  earthly  kings  and  princes.— It  passes  uncon- 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RXLIGION. 


MZ 


tffollabla  lemenca  upon  them  all— and  if  it  find  ai»y  of  them  resisting  God's  or- 
dinance, it  takes  inoreserere  vengeance  of  them,  castine  them  down  from  their 
thniwi,  Ihmigh  never  so  (Missant,  and  tumbling  them  down  to  the  lowest  iiorts 
®f  the  earth,  as  the  ministers  of  aspiring  Lucifer.'  And  then  he  proceeds  to 
Ihinder  against  them,  •  We  deprive  thera  and  their  posterity  forever  of  their 
dominions,  and  kingdoms;'  and  accordingly  he  depnveth  those  pnnces  of  tlieir 
kiMidonis  and  dominions,  absolveth  their  subjects  from  their  oaths  of  allegiance, 
unf  itiffWddcth  them  to  pay  any  obedience  to  them.  '  By  the  authority  of  these 
presents,  we  do  absolve  and  set  free  all  persons,  as  well  jointly  hs  severally, 
imn  any  such  oath,  and  from  all  doty  whnt^oever  in  regard  of  dominion,  fealty 
aad  ohtdlence,  and  do  charge  and  forbid  all  and  every  of  them  that  thev  do  not 
dare  to  obey  them,  or  any  of  their  admonitions,  laws,  and  comtuands.  Bulla 
Sixti  V.  Contra  Henr.  Navarre,  R.  Ac.  m      •        •  # 

Is  this  the  genius  of  oar  government!  Are  these  the  doctrines  of 
the  Uilted  States!  Here  you  have  kings  buried  from  their  thrones 
•mi  sml>|eels  released  from  their  allegiance,  without  ceremony,  by  the 
vicars  of  Christ  and  the  head  of  the  church !  Who  is  this  that  sets 
•side  oaths,  and  religious  obligations,  in  the  ntnis  of  the  Ijord? 
•*  Why,'*  says  the  modem  Roman  Catholic,  "do  you  bring  up  these 
old  things r  Not  so  very  old!  But  wUl  the  bishop  menUoa  the 
council  mat  ever  repudiated  this  doctrine! 

The  bishop  says,  *  they  have  been  repudiated.'  I  thank  him  for 
conceding  that  they  once  existed  !  But  now  for  the  proof  of  their  re- 
pudiation. Nothing  is  infallible  but  a  general  council ;  and  what  gene- 
ral council  has  set  since  the  days  of  pope  Sixtus  V.!  ! !  The  council 
of  Trent  convened  Dec.  13, 1545,  and  all  its  decrees  were  confirmed 
by  the  pope  Jan.  36, 1564 ;  oonsequently,  the  bull  of  pope  Sixtos  V 


is  the  bull  of  the  Reformed  Infallible  Roman  church  after  the  council 
of  Tront ! !    If  it  were  orthodox  then,  it  is  orthodox  now. 

We  shall  now  hear  pope  Pius  V.  (almost  canonized,)  excemmuui* 
cate  the  queen  of  England,  and  for  aught  I  know,  we  Protestants  were 
all  excommunicated  at  the  same  time. 

^  A.  D.  1570.  **  He  that  reigiieth  on  high,  to  whom  is  given  all  power  in  heaven 
and  in  earth,  bath  committed  the  one  holy,  Catholic  and  Apostolic  church,  ont 
of  which  there  is  no  salvation,  to  one  alone  on  earth,  namely,  to  Peter,  prinre 
of  the  apostles,  and  to  the  Roman  pontiff,  successor  of  Peter,  to  be  governed 
with  ajpienitade  of  power;  this  one  he  hath  constituted  prince  over  all  nations 
and  alf  kingdoms,  that  he  might  pluck  up,  destroy,  dissipate,  ruinate,  plant, 
and  build." — And  in  the  same  bull  he  declares,  that  *  he  thereby  deprives  the 
queen  of  her  pretended  right  to  the  kingdom,  and  of  all  dominion,  dignity,  and 

Erivilege  whatsoever;  and  absolves  all  the  nobles,  subjects,  and  people  of  the 
ingdom,  and  whoever  else  have  sworn  to  her,  from  their  oath  and  all  duty 
whatsoever,  in  /egard  of  dominion,  fidelity  and  obedience."  [Camp.  Hist, 
anno.  1570. 

That  this  was  not  peculiar  to  one  individual,  but  of  the  spirit  oi  the 
system,  appears  from  the  following  facts : 

Pope  Clement  Vl.  did  pretend  to  depose  the  Emperor  Lewis  IV. 

Pope  Clement  V.  in  the  great  synod  of  Vienna,  declared  the  emperor  subject 
to  him,  or  standing  obliged  to  him  by  a  proper  oath  of  fealty.  [Clem.  lib. 
ii.  tit.  9. 

Pope  Bonifrce  VUI.  hath  a  decree  extant  in  the  canon  law  running  thus  : 

*  We  declare,  say,  define,  pronounce  it  to  be  of  necessity  to  salvation,  for  every 
human  creature  to  be  subject  to  the  Roman  pontiff." 

A.  D.  1294.  "For  one  sword,  saitb  he,  must  be  under  another,  and  the  tem- 
poral authority  must  be  subject  to  the  spiritual  power; — whence,  if  the  earthi* 
power  doth  ^  astray,  it  most  be  judged  by  the  spiritual  power."     Ibid. 

This  definition  says  Dr.  Barrow,  at  the  foot  of  whose  pages  we  have  the  Latin 
ordinal  of  all  these  decrees,  might  pass  for  rant  of  that  boisterous  pope  (a  man 
above  measure,  ambitious  and  arrogant)  vented  in  his  passion  against  kine  Philip 
of  France,  if  it  had  not  the  advantage  (of  a  greater  than  which  no  papafdecrea 
is  capable)  of  being  expressly  confirmed  by  one  of  their  general  councils;  for 

*  We  (saith  Pope  Leo  X.  in  his  bull  read  and  passed  in  the  liatei-an  council^  do 
renew  and  approve  that  holy  ^constitution,  with  approbation  of  the  present  noly 
council.'  Accordingly  Mech'Cauns  saith,  that  *  the  Lateran  council  did  renew 
and  approve  that  extravagant  (indeed  extravagant)  constitution:*  and  Barro- 
nius saith  of  it,  that  *  all  do  assent  to  it,  so  that  none  dissenteth  who  do  not  by 
discord  fell  from  the  church.' 

The  truth  is,  pope  Boniface  did  not  invent  that  proposition,  but  borrowed  it 
from  the  school;  tor  Thomas  Aquinas  in  his  work  against  the  Greeks,  pretend- 
eth  to  show,  that  H  it  of  tucesnly  to  salvation  io  be  stdject  to  the  Roroaa 

The  appendix  to  Mart  Pol  saith  of  pope  Boniface  VIII.  *  Reg-em  se  Regvm, 
Mtmdi  Monarchmn^tatieum  in  spirUualtbus  et  ten^oraWna  Dominvm  promtd- 
gmvil;*  that  be  openly  declared  himself  to  be  the  king  of  kings,  monarch  of  the 
world,  and  sole  lord  and  governor  both  in  spirituals  and  temporals. 

Before  hin,  pope  Innocent  IV.  did  hold  and  exemplify  the  same  notion;  de* 
^hiring  the  emperor  Frederick  II.  his  vassal,  and  denouncing  in  his  general  couo* 
ctl  of  Liyooa,  a  sentence  o(  deprivation  against  him  in  these  terms:  We  having, 
about  the  forgoing  and  manv  other  his  wicked  miscarriages,  had  before  a  care 
ful  deliberation  wiu  our  bretnren  and  the  holy  council,  seeing  that  we,  although 
nnworthy,  do  hold  the  place  of  Jesus  Christ  on  earth,  and  that  it  vras  said  unto 
us  in  the  person  of  St.  reter  the  apostle,  whatever  thou  shall  bind  on  earth — the 
said  prince  (who  hath  rendered  himself  unworthy  of  empire  and  kingdoms,  and 
of  all  honor  and  dignity,  and  who  for  his  iniquities  is  cast  away  by  God,  and  that 
he  should  not  reign  or  command,  being  bound  by  his  sins  and  cast  away,  and 
deprived  by  the  Lord  of  all  honor  and  dignity)  do  show,  denounce,  and  accor- 
dingly, by  sentence,  deprive ;  absolving  all  who  are  held  bound  by  oath  of  alle- 
giance from  such  oath  forever;  by  apostolical  authority  firmly  prohibiting,  that 
uo  man  henceforth  do  obey  or  regard  him  as  emperor  or  king;  and  decreeing. 

2  B  40 


'■•Si 

m 


DSBATB  ON  Till 

wlioscer  ihall  licretftcr  jidd  ■dtke,  or  lid.  or  hfW  to  hiiii  •■  smparor  ot 
:,  liiall  iinnittdktelr  lie  under  tlie  band  of  excomniuiiicatioii. ' 


ROMAlf  CATHOLIC    RM^IGION. 


aift 


M^mM^tm  him,  pope  imiooeiil  the  third,  (tbet  true  wonder  of  tlM  world,  and 
cIlMttcr  of  the  ife.)  did  affirm  the  pontifical  authority  so  much  to  aicead  the 
9mmptmw,  at  the  sun  doth  the  moon;  "  and  applieth  to  the  former  that  of  the 

Cphet  Jeremiah:  Ecce.  eomtUui  U  taptr  gtiUiS  «*  r«|TW,*--«!e.  I  hate  Ml 
imm  the  iMilioiii  and  of  er  the  kingdoms  to  root  out  and  to  poll  down,  •ad 
to  destroy  and  to  throw  down,"  4c  u    i.  ■    r»  ,1.  i-        j 

Article  xxiii.  Pope  Pius  IV.  ••  I  do  acknowledge  the  bolf  Catholic  and 
apoatolic  Roman  chufch  to  be  the  mother  and  mistrew  of  all  churchet;  and  I 
do  promiae  and  iwear  true  obedience  to  the  biibop  of  Rome,  the  tocceiaor  01 
IMir,  the  prince  of  apostlet,  and  the  vicar  of  Je«ii  Chrirt."    [Tiine  «»pir«i.] 

Maifpatt  4  •^ehckp  P.  M. 
fiimor  PUBCf  'Js  riiet— 

My  iiMMk  ir.  Kimnml  will  i«Mia,  belora  I  eloM,  what  Ligaori  nyt  on 
§m  aub^  of  Mr.  Smitli's  charges  against  the  Catholic  church.  It  aflbrds 
IW  vmm  pieaanro  than  I  can  exprww,  to  have  an  opportonity  of  proving,  by  a 
itntlemm,  who  is  not  a  Catholic,  and  therefore  is  a  disinterested  witnewi,  ■■  fei 
as  I  and  my  religion  are  concerned,  that  it  is  all  a  base  alander. 

W«  hava  heard  a  great  deal  about  the  pope*s  deposing  Mnga,  and  ab«)iving 

mljicli  fniin  their  oaths  of  allegiance,  and  so  on.  In  your  presence  and 
iMliliilg  liiarolbie.  I  am  going  to  put  my  friend  into  one  of  the  most  terrible  di- 
lenunas  in  which  he  has  ever  been  placed  in  his  life.  Now,  sir.  (addressing 
Mr.  C.)  suppose  you  had  bean  ttving  tt  tha  time  of  the  American  Revolu 
lion,  and  waio  witness  to  the  tyranny,  which  these  colonics  had  to  endure, 
m  Iho  pailiif  lis  most  gracious  majesty,  king  George  III.  of  England :  when 
the  spirit  of  a  mighty  and  a  numerous  people  was  roused  by  excess  of  wrong, 
to  make  one  vast  efibrt  for  freedom.  Under  theae  circumslaaosa,  the  Gene* 
ral  in  chief,  the  officers,  and  the  army,  the  revenue  department,  and  poel- 
in«lBn»  all  of  whom  bad  taken  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  that  king,  ap|>eal  to 
von,  il^liiinf  ,  'What  ia  to  'be  done  1  .Asking  you  if  the  oath  was  hmdinf 
What  wonM  be  your  reply  f 

Ma,  Camj'Bkx.i..  If  iity  liad  taken  a  solemn  oath,  Ihey  should  not 
bisak  ill 

Biaaor  Piibob£&.  TImo  waa  George  Washington  a  per}iiier.  and  all  the 
ofllcen  of  the  army  and  navy,  all  the  signers  of  the  Declaration  of  Indo- 
petttece,  and  all  the  subjects  of  the  king  of  Great  Britain  were  pciju- 
levs! ! 

Mb.  OAMPaai.1^    That  does  not  follow  from  my  answer  to  your  question. 

liBwit  PvBCBLi..  And  what  would  you  have  peiaons  to  do^  who  had 
taken'  the  oath  of  allegianoe! 

Ma.  Campbbi.i»  «  it  li  better  not  to  vow,  than  to  ww  and  not  pay"— aa 
saith  thif  good  Book. 

Mr.  Campbell  rose  and  said,  that  for  hia  prt,  we  ahould  always  do  our 
dniy,  and  laave  conaequences  to  God.  When  he  inlenda  the  deliverance  of  a 
Mfle,  he  will  efiect  foe  them  ledemption,  aa  he  did  for  his  people  out  of 
BgypC 

Bisnop  PvBCBLi.  There  ia  no  oath  of  artificial  contrivance,  stronger  than 
the  natural  tie  between  the  auhfect  and  the  king,  the  governed  and  the  gov- 
^pment ;  of  whatever  form  it  may  be.  This  is  an  oath,  prior  and  superi  ir  to 
41  otiMt  oaths.  But  if  tboaa  of  the  colonists,  who  had  not  taken  a  conventional 
egllii  or  an  oath  of  office,  to  the  king  of  England,  had  alone  lehelled.  what  could 
thay  have  done!  Were  not  the  army  and  the  civil  and  military  officers  bound  by 
their  oath  to  resist  rebellion  t  How  then  could  human  rights  have  been  vin 
dicated,  or  human  wrongs  redressed  ?  You  have  repeatedly  said  *'  vex  /fspn/l, 


wm  2>esV'  in  the  course  of  this  discussion ;  in  other  wotds  that  th* 
people's  will  was  the  most  authentic  interpretation  of  the  will  of  (Jod^ 
that  it  could  eive  a  call  to  the  ministry  and  j^ive  to  its  choice  a  right 
to  exercise  spiritual  powers  I !  Thus,  my  friends,  you  see  the  dilem* 
ma  to  which  the  gentleman  has  been  reduced,  and  that,  while  Catho- 
lics are  reproached  for  their  slavish  tenets,  he  himself  teaches  the 
whole  doctrine  of  passive  obedience,  and  condemns  the  very  principle 
of  the  American  Revolution.  I  leave  you  to  reflect  on  what  the  gen- 
tkman  has  uttered.  Now  mark  the  difference.  Had  my  friend  deci- 
ded ray  question,  as  the  Father  of  his  country  did  similar  ones,  he 
would  have  been  sustained  by  the  voice  and  the  spirit  of  the  American 
|>eople— -and  of  all  denominations  thereof,  both  Catholics  and  Protests 
ants,  the  contemporaries  of  a  struggle  in  which,  they,  who  engaged  at 
this  side  the  water,  ^*  periled  every  thing  but  thbib  sacbed  honor.*' 
Whereas,  the  pope,  when  he  absolved  from  their  oath  the  English 
Catholics,  whose  were  the  lands,  and  the  houses,  Uie  churches  and  the 
schools,  the  hospitals  and  the  glory  of  England ;  whose  suffering  ex- 
ceeded those  of  the  American  colonists  as  much  as  the  Alleghanies  do 
a  grain  of  sand,  decided  upon  far  better  grounds  than  did  the  sages  of 
our  Revolution,  that  passive  obedience,  under  such  circumstances, 
ceased  to  be  a  virtue.  Yet  one  word  more— the  absolution  was  con* 
tidered  by  those  very  Catholics,  an  exceeding  of  his  powers,  and  they 
did  not  act  upon  it.     His  decision  was,  for  them,  no  article  of  faith. 

My  friend's  next  resort,  in  the  way  of  documenury  evidence,  is  to 
the  Encyclopedia  of  religious  knowledge,  just  published.  He  does 
not  know  the  author,  or  the  entire  title  of  the  work,  nor  the  history  of 
its  **  getting  up."    Fessenden  is  the  author  of  the  volume.  • 

Mb.  Campbell.    I  do  know  the  author,  but  bishop  Purcell  does  noC 

Bishop  Purcell.  That  is  Protestant  Jesuitism.  He  is  the  pub* 
Usher.  In  the  New  York  Churchman  of  a  recent  date,  there  is  a  story 
told  of  a  most  egregious  imposture  practised  on  the  patrons  of  this 
same  volume.  The  editors  professed  to  give  the  views  of  the 
different  secta,  in  the  very  words  of  their  respective  sundards,  or  ac 
credited  writers,  and  carefully  disguised  the  fact,  that  it  waa  to  be  sob* 
Benrient  to  the  interests  of  one  particular  sect,  the  Baptists.  They  ap- 
plied to  an  Episcopal  minister,  to  write  an  article  on  Episcopacy,  and 
to  patronize  the  publication.  This  looked  like  fair  play— the  poor 
niiniater  was  caught  in  the  snare  and  signed  his  name  recommending 
the  Encyclopiedia.  But  lo !  when  the  work  appeared,  it  was  wholly 
opposed  lo  Episcopalianisro ;  and  this  flagrant  violation  of  the  foith 
due  to  the  public  from  the  publishers,  elicited  a  most  cutting,  but  at 
the  same  time,  most  merited  castigation  from  the  (Episcopal)  Chureh- 
Boan.  I  hope  the  article  will  be  read,  hy  every  sincere  enquirer  after 
Imtli,  that  he  may  he  able  to  appreciate,  according  to  its  value,  this 
lew  humbug. 

We  come  back  to  the  Jesuits.  It  was  so  notorious  to  Frederick, 
the  Great,  of  Prussia,  that  the  Jesuits  had  been  calumniated,  and  most 
foully  dealt  with,  that.  Protectant,  as  he  was.  he  received  them  in  hia 
dominions,  and  placed  them  in  many  of  his  colleges.  He  told  the  other 
kings  of  Europe  that  they  would  soon  be  sorry  for  the  expulsion  of  an 
order  that  had  done  so  much  for  literature  and  science.  **The  day  will 
come,"  said  he,  **when  you  will  be  offering  me,  300  poinds  for  a  pro- 
curator,  400,  for  a  professor,  600,  for  a  Rector,  and  a  ptr  valorem^  for 


' 


t 


116 

^^■P^  ■Mr  ^^ 


DmATB  ON   THS 


MBiinr  {Mom  of  tlie  Iwuitm  Inil  a©p«iid  wpoo  It,  I  will  Urnee  ym 
w%n.  I  will  Bake  jm  pay  dearly  for  your  folly.'*  Frederick  was  a 
mat  Jadfe  of  human  natim,  my  friends,  and  he  had  a  keen  aense  of 
Sm  tapeftoff  elaims  of  the  Jesuits,  for  good  echolarahtp,  and  moralitf. 
Eenoe  his  kingdom  and  his  palace  were  given  them,  with  his  own 
eonMenee.  The  celebrated  preacher,  Bourdaloue,  was  a  Jesuit,  and 
who  has  ever  preached  a  sounder,  or  a  purer  morality  ! 

My  worthy  friend  said,  the  Jesuits  supported  kings  and  monarchi, 
and  weie  for  crushing  the  people ;  and  most  grossly  did  he  contradict 
fclmaelf,  hy  slating  almost  at  the  same  moment,  that  they  were  the  most 
ibrmidalile  enemies  of  kings,  and  it  was  for  their  opposition  to  their 
measoAs,  Hiat  kings  hanished  them  from  several  of  the  kingdoms  of 
Buiope.  Thus  they  were,  according  to  his  account,  the  supportt^rs  of 
kings  and  the  enemies  of  kings!  The  infamous  Pombal  of  Portugal 
Imm  iie  crasade  against  the  Jesuits.  ,  Read  his  history,  and  it  will  be 
inlr  best  vindieation— or  see  them  among  the  savages  of  Pakaooat  ! 
This  word  alone  reveals  to  the  intelligent  reader,  a  series  of  wonders 

Crformed  for  God,  humanity  and  virtue,  such  as  the  world,  perhaps, 
s  never  witnessed  since  the  establishment  of  Christianity. 
Next  comes  the  theocracy  of  the  Jews.  And  is  not  Jehovah  owr 
king  also  f  Is  he  not  ever  Lord  over  all !  Do  we  not  acknowledge 
that  there  is  no  power  but  from  him  I  My  argument  was  this.  If  it 
be  eaaentiallw  Incompatible  with  liberty,  to  obey  the  same  ruler  in 
temporal  and  eoclesiastieal  things,  God  could  not  have  established 
siieh  a  government  on  earth.  But,  God  did  establish  such  an  author^ 
Ity;  ibiMfore,  it  is  not  incompatible  with  liberty.  I  do  not  wish  to 
ace  it  now,  unless  God  should  vouchsafe  to  be  as  manifestly  our  king, 
aa  he  was  the  kin|  of  the  Jews ;  which  is  not  to  happen  under  the 
CkiisilM  dlanensation,  as  it  did  under  the  old  law.  Christ  has  de- 
daiid,  that  Ua  kingdom  is  not  of  this  worid.  My  worthy  opponent 
aald,  that  the  fleshly  body  and  the  heavenly  body  of  Christ,  were  not 
the  same.  I  ask.  then,  what  became  of  his  fleshly  body  1  Did  it  rot 
la  IImi  ground!  I  call  on  him  to  answer  this  question.  "Thou  wilt 
MH  laawe  my  soul  in  hell,"  says  David,  "  nor  wiU  Hum  tufftr  iky  Hoiu 
mm  mm  €immplimu**  (Ps.  xv.  10.)  It  was  spiritualized,  but  stiU 
Iha  tanie  body,  according  to  what  he  said  to  his  disciples,  frighted  at 
-:*i^-  «......«^;«»  ♦»»«,  u^A  c«ian  a  anirit  •  **  Su  Mv  kondM  mnd 

iJUmandhoneM^ 
ever  living," 
I.  vii.  35,)  to  make  intercession  for  us,  by  the  eloouent  mouths  of 
iia  vonMls,  which  he  exhibits,  for  us,  to  his  Father  in  heaven.  He 
pave  tlMm,  aa  he  had  previously  done  to  Thomas,  the  signs  they 
asked  i  while  he  reprehended  them,  as  he  did  that  apostle,  *^ for  slaw 
mtm  ^Mff."  It  was  thus  that,  when  the  Jews  murmured  for  meat 
in  the  wilderness,  loathing  as  light  food  the  manna  of  heaven,  God 
gave  them  meat  to  salaety ;  and  afterwards,  for  their  onbelief,  not  only 
axelnded  them  from  the  land  of  promise,  but  aeatteiad  their  carcaaea 

liy  friend  told  you,  how  much  afraid  he  was  of  Catholics.  My 
friends,  what  a  pretty  tale  he  made  of  it.  I  was  really  going  to  say : 
«*  Poor  baby,  do  not  be  so  afraid :  do  not  be  such  a  coward :  shake  o(f 
IImmo  old  woman'e  feara  about  raw  head  and  bloody  bones,  and  be 
manly."    Washington,  though  he  lived  in  a  less  enlightened 


ilia  ifparitioo,  supposing  they  had  seen  a  spirit :  ^Sui 
m§fiki'  ii  tf  mift^i  Jumdk  and  §eetfyra  ipirii  kaik  mif 
m  fmt  am  mm  .io  hme,**  (Luke  xxiv.  39.)  He  ta  **< 
iiM.  vii.  25,)  to  make  intercession  for  us,  by  the  eloouc 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC   BELIOIOX. 


317 


age  than  this,  was  not  afraid  of  Catholics.  They  stood  by  his  aide  in 
the  battles  for  freedom.  They  never  flinched,  even  at  the  cannon*a 
mouth.  When  he  drew  his  sword  for  this  republic,  they  followed  its 
beaming  to  victory  or  to  death.  La  FayBtte,  and  hosts  of  others, 
whose  chaplains  had  said  mass  for  them  in  the  morning  before  the 
engagement,  bled  or  conquered  in  the  trenches  of  liberty.  And  never 
was  greeting  more  cordial,  or  triumph  more  glorious,  than  theirs, 
when  they  mingled  their  salutations  and  tears  with  thoro  of  their 
American  companions  in  arms,  at  the  surrender  of  Lord  Cornwallis, 
In  York-Town.  Witness,  too,  those  noble  poles,  (Kosciusko !  may 
his  shade  rise  up,  and  rebuke  this  spirit  of  intolerance !)  the  Irish,  the 
South  Americans,  all  fighting  for  liberty,  all  Catholics.  Look  at 
William  Tell,  a  Roman  Catholic.  Go  to  Venice,  for  five  hundred 
years  a  republic,  though  surrounded  by  absolute  governments.  Look 
at  the  little  republic  of  San  Marino,  of  which  John  Adams  has  related 
the  remarkable  history.  There  is  not  such  a  people  for  liberty,  on  the 
globe,  as  the  Roman  Catholics.  Look  nearer  home,  at  Maryland, 
where  the  Catholics  were  the  firSt  that  proclaimed  freedom  or 

CONSCIENCE  IN  THE  WESTERN  HEMISPHERE  !  !     LeT  THIS  BE  OUB  ANSWER 
TO  A  THOUSAND  SLANDERS. 

I  come  now  to  the  oath  of  bishops.  I  have  taken  the  oath  of  alle- 
giance to  the  United  States.  It  was  the  first  I  ever  took.  So  have 
all  my  brethren  in  the  episcopacy  taken  it.  The  head  of  the  Catholic 
ciiurch  in  the  United  States,  is  an  American ;  so  is  a  large  number  of 
our  clergy.  The  rest  preferred  this  country,  believing  there  was  here, 
what  their  own  country  denies,  what  our  constitution  guarantees,  lib 
erty  of  conscience.  The  oath  that  the  bishops  take,  is  not  a  recogni- 
tion of  any  temporal  power  of  the  pope,  out  of  his  own  territory,  called 
the  States  of  the  Church,  in  Italy.  We  would  never  take  the  oath  in 
the  odious  sense,  which  my  opponent  would  force  upon  it.  This  so- 
lemn and  authentic  abjuration  should,  alone,  be  sufficient  to  settle  this 
account ;  for  I  surely  know  what  I  swear  to,  and  that  what  I  here 
state  will  be  seen  and  read  by  those,  whom  no  human  fear  could  deter 
from  denouncing  me  for  error,  if  I  could  be  gjjilty  of  any,  on  a  point 
with  which  I  ought  to  be  so  well  informed.  The  arms  of  our  wuforo 
are  not  carnal,  but  spiritual.  He  that  lakes  the  sword,  we  believe 
with  Jesus  Christ,  will  die  by  the  sword.  Hence,  we  assume  no  ob- 
ligations by  that  oath,  but  such  as  God  imposes ;  and  those  to  be  dia» 
charged  in  his  own  divine  spirit  of  meekness,  charity,  and  good  will. 
It  is  cruel  to  impute  to  us  crimes,  and  to  insist  that  we  hold  doctrines, 
which  we  disavow.  Suppose  I  were  so  base,  as  to  suborn  two  or 
three  wicked  men,  to  calumniate  my  friend  Mr.  Campbell,  and  to  pre- 
tend that  he  was  in  active  correspondence,  for  treasonable  purposes, 
with  some  foreign  king,  ought  my  opponent  to  be  condemned  unheard  ! 
And,  in  the  absence  of  proof;  should  we,  in  spite  of  all  his  protesta- 
tions to  Uie  contrary,  condemn  him  on  suspicion  1  And,  if  any  family 
had  their  reputation  blasted  by  some  base  miscreant,  ought  this  to 
destroy  their  estimation  in  society,  where  his  baseness  is  known  1  All 
the  ministers  in  the  world  may  exert  their  talents  and  influence,  to 

5 reserve  and  promote  peace  and  love  among  mankind ;  but  as  long  as 
ifferences  in  religion  are  suffered  to  create  jealousy,  distrust,  and  ha- 
tred between  brethren;  and  certain  men  make  it  their  trade,  to  go 
from  town  to  town,  for  tibe  express  purpose  of  ftmning  these  anbera 
2b2 


fl 


»: 


.TB  Olf  TM'B 


I 


816 

PIMI  ooRtiiie  to  Iw  tie  ▼ietiina  of  the  maltfolent,  imi  our  relii^ioii,  uid 
iNif  eoDStitiiiion,  provo  to  be  no  more  than  the  idlett  day-dream.  AD 
the  Mnp  and  states  of  Europe,  Protestant  and  Catholic,  know  that 
the  biahiiiie  take  that  oath,  and  yet,  in  none  of  them  is  a  bishop  looked 
upon  with  distrust.  In  Prussia,  Sweden,  Denmark,  England,  the 
goYemment  never  molests  a  bishop  aboat  an  oath,  which  is  luiown  to 
eontain  nothing  at  which  the  most  capttous  statesman  could  justly  take 
eieeption.  Is  not  this  sufficient  proof,  that  there  is  in  that  oath  ijptb- 
jlig  of  what  my  friend  attributes  to  it  I  assure  him.  Catholic  bish- 
ops are  not  the  enemies  that  this  repoblie  needs  to  fear. 

fiTerr  argument  my  friend  employs  agiinsi  the  Eachaiist,  only 
proves  him  an  inconsistent  reasoner,  or  a  deist,  as  lar  as  the  argument 
foes*  The  paschal  lamb  was  i  figure  of  the  eucharist,  and  the  %ure 
Siwe  siiiely  nobler  than  the  reality,  if  we  hsTe  nothing  better  than  m 
bit  of  bread  in  the  eucharist.  Bat  the  apostle  tells  us  that  the  weak 
and  bentrly  elements  of  the  Jewish  rites,  were  to  obtain  their  glori- 
ous fumlment  in  the  land  of  grace— and  only  in  .the  Catholic  church 
Is  thie  verified.  We  eat  the  paschal  lamb  sprinkled  with,  or  in  other 
woidSf  veiled  beneath  the  appearance  of  bread ;  and  every  objection 
urged  a^inst  the  real  presence  is  eqiially  strong,  or  weak  against  the 
incarnation.  Can  this  paste,  says  Mr.  C.  be  God  !  I  answer  by  an- 
other i|uestion :  can  this  informal  embryo  in  a  virgin*s  womb  be  God  I 

We  come  now  to  Scotus.  The  gentleman  says  he  heard  or  saw 
him  quoted  by  the  Catholics.  He  says  many  people  quote  Zoroas- 
ter and  Confucius  without  knowing  any  thing  about  them.  There  is 
no  parallel  between  them.  If  a  man  quotes,  as  evidence,  a  writer, 
like  Scotus,  he  ought  to  know  who  he  was.  I  do  not  blame  him  for 
knowing  nothing  of  Chinese  theology.  But  of  Christian  theology, 
it  is  a  £ame  for  a  man,  who  pretends  to  be,  himself,  a  teacher  in  Isra^ 
el,  and  a  polemic,  who  challenges  Catholic  bishops,  to  be  so  grossly 
'Iguorant. 

My  friend  mja  we  bow  to  the  pope.  In  England,  Protestants  bow 
to  the  foot-stoof  of  the  throne.  1  bow  to  any  trlend  I  meet — I  do  not 
pay  him,  nor  the  pope  divine  honor.  We  know  the  meaning  of  our 
own  bows,  and  words,  and  oaths,  and  would  not  pledge  them  insin- 
eetelj,  much  less  blasphemously.  No  wonder  that  the  pope  let  kirn- 
mf  ie  permtaded  to  do  good,  in  the  case  cited  by  my  friend.  Should 
he  hftie  preferred  a  contrary  course  ?    Have  done  evil  t 

Temporal  power  is  infenor  to  spiritual  power,  as  human  power  is 
inferior  to  divine ;  just  as  heaven  is  superior  to  earth,  in  dignity  and 
▼alue,  and  God  superior  to  creatures,  in  every  divine  excellence,  but 
not  in  the  sense  that  he  who  has  been  invested  with  spiritual  power 
by  God,  has  also  been  invested  by  him,  in  m  kinsdom  which  is  not  of 
this  world,  with  temporal  power.  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  greatest 
scholar  of  the  13th  century,  and  eminent  scholar  in  the  darl  ages, 
read  his  works,  with  those  of  a  Kempis,  for  proofs  of  Catholic  piety, 
Instead  of  garbled  extracts  from  forgeries,  and  the  works  of  apostates, 
whom  we  liscarded  from  our  communion  for  immoralities,  which  no 
Protestant  communion  would  tolerate.  They  breathe  the  spirit  of 
devotion,  the  spirit  of  God. 

My  friends,  Mr.  Kinmont  will  now  tell  you  whether  the  pretended 
quotation  of  Mr.  Smith  from  Liguori,  is  eoirect.  You  will  recollect 
ttiat  Mr.  Smith  said,  that,  aee^rding  to  Liguori,  the  Catholic  church 


KOMAN   CATHOLIC    WRLIGION. 


Sin 


aIIowi  priests  to  keep  concubines  upon  a  fine.  Upon  hearing  this  I 
at  once  said  that  the  charge  vras  an  infamous  falsehood ;  and  I  wiU 
now  show  that  Liguori  said  no  such  thing ;  that  Liguon  says  the  con- 
trary. If  I  tell  a  falsehood  Mr.  Kinmont  will  confound  me;  if  1 
do  not,  somebody  does.  Thus  truth  wiU  triumph  and  falsehood  he 
confounded. 


niounaea.  .  ^     •      i    u       ..«:«. 

Mr.  Kihmont.  I  am  called  on  in  my  professional  character  sim- 
ply, und  have  no  part  or  lot  in  this  debate,  (Mr.  K.  is  understood  to 
m  m  Swedenborgian)  I  sincerely  believe  they  are  disputing  about 
•hMl^ws,  and  that  both  parties  are  equally  in  Oie  wrong ;  but  I  wUI 
do  what  I  can  to  assist  m  clearing  up  the  difficulty  ^/ac/.  1  find 
it  stated  in  Samuel  Smith's  work  and  marked  as  a  quotation  from 
Liiruori  under  the  article  headed  "  concubines  of  clergy. 

CoNCULINts  UF  THE  CLtRGr.-"  A  bishop  however  poor  ^f  j^'^y  ^*  ^^^J"} 
appropriate  to  hin.wlf  pecuniary  fines  without  the  license  of  the  Apostolicri 
See.  *But  he  ought  to  apply  them  to  pious  uses  Much  less  can  he  a^lj  hose 
fine,  to  any  thiol  else  but  pious  uses,  which  the  Council  of  7ren^  has  aid  upon 
non-resideat  cle^ynien.or  upon  those  tUr^^tn  who  ke^  concubmts.  -Ligor. 
Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444. 

▲ad  the  following  is  Smith's  commentary.—  „  .,  .u  ♦  •    a  . 

How  thameful  a  thing,  that  the  Apostolical  See,  u  they  call  it.  that  ".that 
_  __  _r  D .u^f.iA  o«..:..K  hia  roffpn.  hv  the  6ne8  which  he  receive*  froni 


for  it;  but  U  tney  morrvi  tney  luusi  uc  c-.v«.» "»»."- •  n  .u^  ;-i„-j 

once,  for  the  custom  in  Spain,  and  other  countries,  and  especially  on  the  island 
of  Cu^.  and  in  South  America;  where  almost  every  pnesthas  concubines,  v^ho 
SreC^n  by  the  name  of  nie^e*.  These  abandoned  ™^"  ^^^ '^'"'.Jg/^ri 
?he  fiSe  rather  than  forego  the  gratification  of  the. r  lustful  W^*^/-  J^* 
"  Narrative  of  Rosamond,"  who  was  once  herself  one  ol  these  concu- 
binelTn  t^e  fsland  of  Cuba,  portrays  the  general  ^^<^-f}<^TTj[t^J^JT. 
clerg;.  in  color,  so  shocking,  that  the  picture  cannot  be  ^^^^^  Jil^'^^^lt 
WoS.  Here  we  see  the  doctrine  fiilly  exemplified  bv  practice.  This  keeping 
of^ncabfn«ri.  a  thing  so  common  In  the  popish  West  India  islands  and  in 
Sooth  Amerlc,  that  it  fs  rarely  noticed,  fhe  offspring  of  t*^"  P""^'^^  °*"; 
course  are  numerous.  They  afe  known  to  be  the  chilcfren  of  J^^Pnff  •  bat. 
becauae  it  is  the  general  ci#foin.f<  is  lawful;  and  it  passes  off  merely  with  a 

^'ThT.r£rtext  and  commentary  a.  I  find  it  in  Mr.  Smith's  hook. 
This  is  marked  as  Liguori,  p.  444.  If  taken  from  Liguori  at  all,  it  ts 
taken  from  m  different  edition.  The  present  purporte  to  be  a  complete 
copy  of  the  works  of  Liguori.  It  bears  no  mark  of  being  an  expur- 
iratod  edition.  It  is  said  to  be  an  edition  f  what  was  mU  and  written 
tefore  with  additions.  On  turning  to  the  place  where  he  treats  of  fines 
and  punishments  inflicted  for  concubinage,  he  says  that  pnests  guilty 
of  this  offence,  were,  after  two  ineffectual  reprimands,  to  be  degrad^ 
from  Uieir  functions.  He  refers  to  the  council  of  Trent,  and  states 
what  that  council  decreed.  Smith  throws  us  on  Liguon,  wid  LiguOTi 
on  the  council  of  Trent.  There  is  nothing  in  Liguori  relating  to  that 
subject  but  this.  The  council  was  called  about  the  year  1642.  /^is 
edifion  of  the  decrees  of  the  council  was  edited  bv  tae  council  itself. 
1  haye  had  an  abstract  taken  which  I  will  read.  It  would  take  some 
Hme  to  lead  the  original,  and  I  have  a  translatton  made  by  one  ot  my 

^^tZ:  relrdl^nSf  ]^^  of  the  ronncil  of  Trent.  Se«.on  25th.  char. 
14th.  the^T,  described  the  method  of  proceeding  in  the  cases  of  clergy,  who 

•^A^fir'i^win'rtheSal  and  enormity  of  this  sin.  especially  in  clergy,  who.- 
int^rity  ollifef  Aould  recommend  and  fUpret.  the  precepts  of  religion  and  of 


f 


tlM'  ch'itrcli;  'Hie  mtmi  tjiiod  forbids  tbat  any  iiidifidiml  Mdiag  the  clarietl 
oiics  fliall  l«ep  at  hm  mm  or  eliewlMrt,  mj  nitstren  or  niicliasto  woown  or 
Cnhtliit  witl>  any  utich,  under  the  peoalty  of  sariii|[^  enlbrc«d  against  hini  ihm 
tacrdi  canoDf ,  awl  eccleaiastiod  statutes  regarding  that  matter.  It  is,tlien,espe- 
ciallj  anaetMi  lliat  if  wlien  admonished  by  their  superiors  they  shall  not  desist 
froni  all  such  unlawful  and  forbidden  acts,  they  shall  be  depn>ed  of  the  third 
|«rf  of  all  their  revenues  and  ecclesiastical  dues:  and  if  still  perseTeriof  In  their 
connetthcy  shall  not  even  he«d  a  9te<md  admonition,  they  shall  b«  deprived  of 
mil  their  ecclesiastical  re/enne  and  suspended  from  the  administration  of  eccle- 
aiatticai  functiont;  and  if,  dnrin?  this  suspension,  they  shall  continue  obstinate 
md  §mmrigiht€,  they  shall  be  declared  altogether  unfit  and  incompetent  to  ex> 
ercis*  any  spiritual  office  whatever  belono^ing  to  the  church ;  unless  after  a  clear 
•Ml  nneqalvocal  amendment  of  life,  the  church  should  think  proper  to  with. 
draw  the  diaoinliication,  and  allow  them  to  resume  their  former  station  of 
honor  and  trust  But  if  after  the  resumption  of  the  duties  of  their  office,  they 
shunld  resort  to  those  impure  oractices  which  they  had  abandoned,  besides  the 
ialiction  of  the  above  named  penalUes,  an  act  of  excommunication  with  its 
•wurd  of  justice  shall  cut  them  oli;  as  dead  branches  from  the  body  of  the  faith- 
ill  and  church  of  the  living  God.  And  it  is  fiurlher  enacted  that  no  appeal,  or 
•atmption  shall  hinder  the  execution  of  any  of  these  decrees,  but  that  tney  shall 
he  iUMiarily  eaccuted.  at  the  will  of  the  bishop,  after  he  has  ascertained  the 
existence  of  the  enonuities.  A  similar  provision  in  its  eflects  and  spirit  is  made 
tljh  relation  to  bishops  themselves,  but  the  order  of  proceeding  ts  different 
This  b  in  sub^itance  the  provision  of  the  decree  of  the  council  of  Trent.  Sat 
SifCap^  14.     [Time 'eipi;r«d.J 


4 


SATURDAY,  Jamujiet  SIot,  Ma^-pad  9  o'dot^  J.  M, 

Mft.  Campbell  rises — 

Unier  any  other  circnmstanoes  than  the  preaent,  I  shonld  Itava  in* 
aisled  on  heing  allowed  the  same  number  of  minutes  oyer  my  stipu- 
lated hour,  which  mj  fncnd  has  taken  with  Mr.  Kinmonfa  expoei 
tion,  over  his  usual  tmie. 

Bishop  Purcsli — ^I  have  no  objeetion  to  Mr.  Campbell's  oocudy 
ingthat  much  more  time.     It  it  nght  thai  he  should. 

J  "iti?**"'""''^  '  ^'  oblifled  to  the  gentleman  for  his  courtesy, 
and  will  therefore  proceed.  My  friends,  you  will  doubtless  have  oh 
served,  that  of  all  the  extracts  read  from  Ligori,  found  on  the  paffea 
of  Smith,  but  one  was  challenged  by  the  Bishop,  on  the  ground^l 
itia  mot  found  in  the  page  of  Si  Ligori  in  the  edition  now  befoie  na. 
llie  ease  la  siiii|ily  this.  Aecoiding  to  the  moral  theology  of  the  choich 
of  Rome,  marriage  is  a  greater  sin  than  eonenbinage :  for.  If  a  piieat 
raanyt  he  la  forthwilli  excommunicated;  but  if  he  keep  a  conenhine 
he  only  pays  a  fine.  This  is  the  statement  tbat  Mr.  Smith  makes. 
and  tianalalea  Ike  fvaasage  in  Ligori  aa  followa : 

'*  A  bishop, however  poorhe  may  be,  cannot  appropriate  to  hiuMelf  pecnBiary 
f^iTli  °°i.     .l'*^*"f  '**'  the  Apostolical  see.    But  he  ou^bt  to  apply  them 


*®  P^iSfir*!:  ^'"*='*.I««  <»«>  be  apply  those  fines  to  any  thmg  else  Kut  pious 
uses,  wttleu  the  c:»iincil  of  Trent  has  laid  upon  non-resident  clenryroen.  or  unon 
ihtm  eitM«MiiiA«  lr«<|i  eoneiiWitet.-    Lig«r.  Ep.  Dor.  Mor.  ^AU.  ^ 

Mow,  Biahop  PuBCELL  denies  that  there  is  such  a  passage  in  Ligo- 
fi,  or  that  there  is  in  the  council  of  Trent  any  such  arrangement;  and 
in  pioof  of  It,  he  has  brought  us  an  edition  of  St  Ligori,  and  the  de- 
eieea  of  the  council  of  Trent.  But  the  edition  which  he  has  produ- 
eed,  haji  not,  upon  the  page  referred  to,  the  passage  quoted.  In  the 
pasaage  quoted,  the  reference  to  Ligori  is  to  a  decree  of  Trent.    But 


BOMAN  CATHOUC    BSLIOIOX 

iiera  are  always  two  waya  of  quoting  a  passage :  the  one  mfhaHmi 
and  the  other,  mMbUantially.  Whether  Ligori  quotes  the  decree  of 
Trent  literally,  or  only  quotes  the  substance,  we  cannot  affirm.  Ihe 
bishop  referred  this  matter  to  Mr.  Kinmont,  without  consulting  me. 
It  was  an  exparte  reference;  and  therefore,  comes  not  fairly  before 
ma.  Although  I  have  no  objection  to  Mr.  Kinmont;  but  on  the  con- 
trary, I  thill  him  very  competent  to  decide  a  matter  of  this  kind,  if 
he  had  time  to  examine  all  these  volumes :  and  perhaps,  had  I  been 
consulted,  I  should  have  agreed  in  selecting  him :  yet  as  tiie  refer- 
ence is  wholly  one  sided ;  it  can  have  no  authority  here.  However, 
ao  far  as  the  decrees  of  Trent  have  been  read,  they  do  speak  of  fines 
er  forfeitures  of  those  who  have  concubines,  and  these  do  substan- 

ttally  sustain  all  that  I  have  alleged.  ^  ,,     c,    •  ,.♦     •       u-  1. 1 

I  have  this  morning  received  a  paper  of  Mr.  Smith's,  in  which  J 
find  an  article  "  on  ihe  autkonty  of  Ligori,'"  which  I  will  now  read. 

"  Alphonsus  dc  Ligori  was  canonized  by  Pope  Pius  VII.  on  the  15th  oJ  bep. 
teniber,  A.  D.  1815,  under  the  title  of  the  Most  Illustrious  and  Most  Reverend 
Lord  Alphonsus  de  Ligorio.  He  has  written  the  Modern  Theology  of  the 
church  of  Rome,  in  nine  large  volumes,  containing  4701  pages,  which  was  pub- 
lisbed  at  Mechlin.  Superiorum  Permissu,  A.  D.  1828. 

His  Theology  is  called,  in  the  preface  of  the  work,  "The  Light. 'His  doc- 
trine  after  having  been  explored,  was  approved  of  by  Pope  Pius,  VII.  on  the 
18th  May,  1803,  after  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  Rites  had  given  it  their  sanc- 
lioD.  and  had  declared  that  there  was  NOTHING  IN  FT  WORTHl  OF  C1W8UWB. 
Ligori  was  spoken  of  by  the  sacred  Pontiff,  Leo  XII.  in  the  highest  terms;  and 
his  eminence  the  Serene  Cardinal  of  Castile,  the  Major  Penitentiary,  in  his  letters 
to  the  Bishop  of  Massilien,  says.thnt  Saint  Ligon  is  not  only  an  ornament  to  the 
Episcopal  character  by  the  illustrious  splendor  of  his  virtues;  but  he  shines  re- 
splendent  by  his  soUND  DOCTRINE,  which  ia  acconhng  to  Ood.  Uoctrinam 
lauctam.ac  secundum  Deum."     (Pref.  Editoris.) 

In  his  pie&ce  to  his  Synopsis  Mr.  Smith  observes : 
"If  they  deny  that  we  have  given  a  fair  translation,  we  will  then  challenge 
them  to  come  forward  in  apublw  assembly  with  the  works  of  St.  Ligon.  when  w« 
promise  to  meet  them,  and  submit  our  translation,  and  the  original,  to  the  inspec. 
lion  of  a  committee,  one  half  of  whom  to  be  chosen  by  ourse^lves,  and  the  other 
half  by  the  Roman  clergy.  Truth  never  shuns  investigation.  If  !^c  *\^va  not 
giveDit  fair,  genuine,  and  true  translation,  and  if  we  have  nft"^**^jf•3 
twines  of  Ligori.  and  the  church  of  Rome  fairly  and  correctly,  without  garbling, 
orrivingan  erroneousconstruction,  we  will  be  willing  to  incur  the  consequences 
that  we  ought  to  expect,  for  having  deceived  the  public.       Sy nop.  Fret.  p.  «. 

I  vrill  thank  the  Bishop  to  inform  me  the  date  of  his  edition  ot  the 

'^Bishop  Pubcell ^What  is  the  date  of  Mr.  Smith's  edition  ! 

Ma.  Campbell. — 1828. 

Bishop  PtrBCELL— This  edition  [pointong  to  his  own]  was  tlao 
published  in  1828 :  so  that  it  appears  both  are  the  same. 

Mb.  Campbell  [here  taking  up  a  volume  of  the  Bishop  s  copy  of 
Ligori  read]  *'i?rff7to  iVotw  Emendaia,*^  It  hence  appears  that  the 
Bishop's  IB  anew  amended  edition ;  so  that,  probably,  this  and  tha 
006  used  by  Mr.  Smith  are  not  the  same.  Be  this,  hovrever  as  it  mar, 
■othing  is  lost  by  the  examination :  nothing  is  proved  a^msl  Mr, 
Smith  as  a  translator,  and  I  shall  write  forthwith  to  New  York  to  Mr. 
Smith  for  the  original  Latin  of  this  passage  in  his  edition,  and  have 
it  certified  and  published  among  this  community. 

But  were  it  lawful  to  read  in  this  assembly,  I  have  before  me  the  de- 
erees  of  councils,  and  the  words  of  bishops  and  cardinals,  teaching 
the  very  doctrine  which  the  Bishop  would  represent  as  a  reproach 
or  Mliimny  on  his  clergy  and  church.  Here  is  the  decree  of  a  conn- 
Si 


I 


y 


I 


MBA1S  mv  THB 

eil  alfibltdo,  wnA  hem  ave  tefefeDcet  to  ▼arioin  eoniMilt,  mrali  ••  B^ 
▼ii  Concilift,  Tom.  I.  pp.  737, 739.  Crabb.  Ooneil.  Tom.  I.  p.  449. 
Editioo  of  1551,  and  Pithou  Corp.  Ju.  Canon,  p.  47,  as  quoted  by  Dr. 

Blliwiik%  wliinii  jfo  to  prohibit  priests  **Jf0m  kemimg  more  than  one 
mmeMfmf**  and  deelare  marriage  in  a  priest  to  be  "  m  mortal  sin.*' 
And  here  it  Costema  and  cardinal  Campvgio  who  taught  what  I  date 
MH  Dead  hero ;  but  I  will  reserve  all  this  for  a  more  convenient  season. 
[Mr.  Campbell  here  called  for  the  reading  again  of  the  seventh 

Cropoaitioii,  which  being  read  by  Mr.  Bttt,  one  of  the  Modeiatoit, 
•  pfooeeded.] 

iObiNit  the  year  1068,  Urban  II.  decrees : 

••That  Mbjecti  are  by  no  authority  constiained  to  p«y  the  fidelity  which  tli«y 
haire  iwora  to  ■  chmtiaii  prince,  who  oppo«eth  Ciod  and  his  mints,  or  violatetfc 
their  precepts.*  An  imtaooe  whereof  we  have  in  his  granting^  a  privilegie  to  the 
SSf  ®''T<Ww;  •which,'  MJth  he.  •  if  any  emperor,  kiur,  prince,  4kc.  thati 
"■*•■■"  -tj^npt  to  thwart,  let  him  be  deprived  of  the  dignity  of  his  honor  and 
[Barrow,  p.  32. 

,  the  ooiineil  of  Toledo  ttil!  more  folly  expresses  the  spirit 

of  tie  igo^ 

••  We  the  holy  council  proroulge  this  sentence  or  decree,  pleasing  to  God,  that 
whoHMVtr  hcfeaHer  shall  succeed  to  the  kingdom,  shall  not  mount  the  throne, 
till  h«  h«i  pt ofa  maomg  other  oaths,  to  peiroit  no  man  to  live  in  bis  kingdom, 
wAo  M  iMf  •  p^mik.  And  if  after  he  hat  taken  the  reins  of  govemraetit,  he 
shall  tiolate  hia  promise,  let  him  be  anathema  maranatha,  in  the  sight  of  the 
etmnlCaod,  aad  become  fuel  of  eternal  ire— pabulum  ignis  aitemi.    [Carania, 

Innocent  III.  (that  tme  wonder  of  the  world  and  changer  of  the 

^■■el  'iliiiiis : 

•*  Ondtf  Alfa  laaooeat.  III.  it  was  ordained,  that  tf  any  temporal  lord,  being 
r  quired  and  aditioiiiahed  br  the  church,  should  neglect  to  purge  bis  territory 
from  heretical  filth,  he  should  by  the  metropolitan  and  the  other  comprovincial 
bishops,  be  noosed  in  the  band  of  czcommunicaUon  ;  and  that  if  he  should  slight 
to  make  satts&ction  within  a  year,  it  shooid  be  signified  to  the  Pope,  that  be 
■MKhlfroni  that  time  denounce  thasabjecU  absolved  Anom  their  fealty  to  him, 
aad  eipose  the  territory  to  be  seised  on  by  Catholics."    Barrow,  p.  ^ 

Adrian  I.  A.  B.  773t  thus  decrees: 

•*  W«  do  bv  general  decree  constitute,  that  whatever  king,  or  bishop,  or  po« 
iale,  shall  heMaHar  believe,  or  permit,  that  the  censure  of  the  Roman  pow- 
■  OMy  he  violated  in  any  case,  he  shall  be  an  execrable  anathema,  and  shall  be 
ilty  belbro  God,  as  a  betrayer  of  the  Catholic  feith."    P.  Had.  I.  Capit  apad 

■t.  Caus.  m»v.  qa.  1.  c.  11. 

Leo  IX.  says,  that  Constantine  M.  "did  think  it  very  unbecoming 
that  thaf  aheuld  be  subject  to  an  earthly  empire,  whom  the  Divine 
Mtjesty  had  set  over  an  heavenly.'*  Of  Gregory  II.  who  lived 
A.  D;730,  Baironius  says,  "  He  effectnally  caused  both  the  Romana 
and  Italians  to  recede  from  obedience  to  tlie  emperor.'*  «•  So,"  «}ob 
Holies  this  authentio  hiaieiiiiir-*^  he  did  leave  to  posterity  a  worthy 
eiample  that  hewtieil  princes  should  not  be  suffered  to  reign  in  the 
dmnti  of  Christf  if  being  warned  they  should  be  found  pertinacioiiff 
§■  iiiif.'*  To  consummate  the  whole,  Gregory  II.  did  say  to  the  em- 
piet  Mnios :  "  All  the  kingdome  of  the  west  did  hold  St.  Peter  as 
an  earthly  God." 

Wiihing  to  crowd  ae  much  into  this  speech  as  I  possibly  can  in 

one  hour,  I  shall,  witli  as  much  rapidity  as  is  consistent  with  distinct- 
oeiaof  enunciation,  hasten  througii  many  documents.  Thus  we  have 
seen,  that  for  at  least  five  centuries,  the  heads  of  the  Roman  church 
clearly  and  unambiguously  taught,  that  the  spiritual  sword  was  above 
**^  tempenl,  and  that  the  vicar  of  Chrt»t  h  by  a  divine  right  Loi4 


BUit] 


KOHAH   CATHOLIC    BEUGION. 

of  thrones  and  all  earthly  tilings.  This,  I  have  no  doubt,  is  the  true 
doctrine  of  the  immutable  and  infallible  church  of  Rome!  aud  ccitain 
it  is,  that  it  has  never  been  disowned,  or  renounced,  by  a  general 
council,  the  organ  of  infallibility.  If  the  church  of  Rome  be  msus- 
ceptible  of  reformation,  or  infallible ;  it  is  proved  to  be  essentially 
anti- American,  and  opposed  to  the  genius  of  our  institutions. 

To  resume  the  bishop's  oath.  The  gentleman  at  length  admitted 
that  he  had  taken  the  bishop's  oath,  by  saying,  that  he  took  the  oath 
of  naturalization/r«<  /  /  There  is  but  one  oath  for  Roman  bishops  m 
all  countries,  therefore,  the  Bishop  is  sworn  to  »*  increase  and  advance 
the  authority  of  the  pope,"  and  persecute  and  oppose  (fight  against) 
heretics  and  schismatics.  If  he  have  not  taken  this  oath,  he  will  please 
refer  us  to  the  oath  he  has  sworn,  and  specify  its  peculiarities. 

The  defence  is  a  very  singular  one.     He  first  swore  allegiance  to 
the  United  Stales,  and  then  to  that  foreign  prince  the  pope.     Does  he 
mean,  contrary  to  common  usage,  that  the  first  oath  is  more  binding 
than  the  second ;  or,  that  it  neutralizes  the  anti-American  attributes 
of  the  second.  But  his  explanation  is  but  half  given  in  the  first  point, 
that  he  took  the  oath  of  American  allegiance  before  he  took  the  oath 
of  Roman   allegiance.     The  other   ground  of  defence  was  in  the 
query,  which,  with  such  a  triumphant  air,  he  put  to  me  yesterday 
evening— via.  whether  I  would  not  have  been  justified  in  breaking 
my  oath  to  England,  had  I  been  an  American  colonist  or  soldier  at 
the  time  of  the  revolution,  when  the  king  tyrannized  over  the  AjMcn- 
cans  1    I  have  already  answered  this  question,  and  have  aflSTmed  that 
in  Protestant  doctrine,  no  circumstance  or  contingency,  can  ever  ab- 
solve a  person  from  the  obligation  of  an  oath,  into  which  be  has  in- 
telligently and  voluntarily  entered.     It  is  in  the  estimation  of  chris- 
tians most  impious  and  daring  for  any  prince  or  pope  to  presume  to 
absolve  men  fiom  the  obliffations  of  an  oath  solemnly  taken.     If,  in- 
deed, an  oath  has  in  it  the  nature  of  a  covenant,  then  one  of  the 
parties  failing,  so  for  vacates  the  covenant  as  to  set  the  other  free 
from  his  oath :  but  this  is  not  absolution  for  breaking  it;  it  is  a  simple 
annulling  of  its  conditions.     Now,  in  the  case  supposed,  the  kin^  of 
England  was  generally  allowed  to  have  receded  from  the  conditions 
on  which  that  oath  was  taken  by  the  persons  who  renounced  alle- 
giance to  him ;  he  having  failed  to  protect  and  cherish  his  American 
subjects,  according  to  the  tenor  of  the  charter  given,  they  were  freed 
from  the  obligations  of  allegiance.     But  I  beg  my  audience  lo  re- 
member that  the  bishop  attempts  to  defend  himself  for  breaking  his 
oath  in  certain  contingencies :  else,  why  ask  me  such  a  questton  f 
The  hishop's  plea  is,  therefore,  that  oaths  may  he  broken,  and  that 
the  pope  can  absolve  men  from  allegiance  on  a  justifiable  emergency, 
when  the  church,  or  some  other  great  interest  may  demand  it !    Of 
what  use  then  is  the  oath  of  naturalization  1 — 

That  the  incompatibility  of  the  bishop's  oath  with  our  oath  of  al- 
legiance may  be  obvious,  I  shall  quote  the  oath  of  naturalization,  «• 
proposed  to  every  foreigner  by  the  laws  of  the  United  States: 

The  lairs  of  the  U.  S.  provide;  That  any  alien,  beioff  a  free  white  person, 
may  be  admitted  to  become  a  citizen  of  tbeU.  S.  or  any  of  them,  on  the  follow- 
bg  condition,  and  not  otherwise:  That  he  shall  have  declared  on  oath,  or  afllr- 
Stion,  before  the  supreme  superior,  district,  or  circuit  court,  of  some  one  of 
the  states,  or  a  court  of  record,  having  a  clerk  and  seal— 3  years  at  least  befora 
admission. 


824 


WMBAVM  OM  rax 


Iff.  0*14  ^  Jbf«iilltii.. 
"■TlMt  it  wai  hmmjidi,  hb  iotentioo  to  become  «  citiien  of  tlM  U.  S.  and  to 
IKWK«  foreTer,  afi  allegiance  and  fidelity,  to  aiij  foreign  Prince,  Potentata, 
Statu  or  Sovereif  ntj,  whattoever;  and  partjcalarly,  by  namet  the  Prince,  Potaa* 


tate,  State  or  Sofereknt^.  whereof  he  niaj.at  the  time  be  aetlttm  orfMAf'icl. 
•liallt  at  the  time  of  his  application  to  be  admitted,  declare,  on  oatl 


Tnatbe     , ^^ 

or  affirmation,  liiiforaacourt  as  above. 

U.  Omth  ^  Mtmmeimimm,MwmHon,  tfc.  md  *f  FUUUiy  on  Admimwm. 

**Tliat  ho  will  support  the  coastitution  of  the  U.  S.  and  that  he  doth  absolutely 
and  oaiiralj  renounce  and  abjure  all  allegiance  and  fidelity  to  every  foreira 
Mnee,  Plofoiata,  State  or  Sovereienty  whatever;  and  particularly  by  name 
the  Frinca,  Potentate,  State,  Sovareigaty  whereof  he  was  before  a  citizen  or 

TIm  court  admitting  the  alien  to  be  wtkied  that  he  has  resided  five  yeui 
within  the  U.  S.  one  year  in  the  state,  and  that  he  has  behaved  u  a  man  of 
good  moral  diaracter,  attached  to  the  principles  of  the  constitution  of  the  U.  S. 
■ad  well  dteoMli  to  the  good  order  and  happiness  of  the  same.  The  retidenca 
to  be  proved  by  a  witness,  not  by  oath  of  the  applicant. 

1|f Imm  a  iWfMMI  coming  into  the  United  States  3  years  before  21  yean  of  ag% 
proving  tame  ciiaracter,  and  continued  residence  5  years,  admitted  as  befora 
stated  on  the  first  application,  on  taking  final  oath  of  abjiifation,  renmnciation, 
iLi.i;*.  jtc.  without  the  first  oath  of  intention 


Pliliar  providad;  That  in  case  the  alien  applying  to  be  admitted  to  cititen* 
dMipt  aiall  hmm  bomm  any  heredttaiy  title,  or  been  o?  any  of  the  orden  of  No- 
bility, in  the  kingdom  or  state  from  which  became,  he  shall  in  addition  to  tha 
abova  requisites,  make  an  express  renunciation  of  his  title  or  order  of  Nobility, 

at  tia  time  to  be  recorded,  Iec. 
Further  provided— That  no  alien  who  shall  be  a  native  citiaen,  deniseo,  or 

■algort  of  wan  OMmtiy,  state  or  sovereign,  with  whom  the  U.  S.  shall  be  at  war  at 
Iha  twia  of  iis  application,  shall  ba  than  admitted  to  b«  a  citisen  of  the  U.  S.' 

Ac.  'At. 

Siioli  are  llio  oaths  and  laws  of  naturalisation.  Now,  as  the  pope 
of  Rome  Is  a  foreign  prince— «it  this  veij  moment  a  prince  temporal 
•8  well  as  spiritual,  exereimng  poHHad  auikoriiy  over  ike  »iaie§  ^ 
Mome,  and  claiminpr  alle|riance  in  temporals  as  well  as  spirituals, 
throti^^hout  the  whole  Roman  Catholic  world ;  I  ask,  can  any  one 
who  has  sworn  •*  to  inereate  and  admnee  hit  mUkofity^''^  or  feeling 
kiiiself  so  boimd,  as  he  shall  answer  for  it  to  the  supreme  judge  of  the 
ttniterse,  lake  m  keep  the  oath  of  eitisenship  in  this  country  without 
lieriiary  f !    In  my  most  deliberate  judgment,  it  is  impossible. 

The  case  is  simplj  this :  The  oath  of  naturalisation  requires  the 
cBMlliiate  for  citiienship  to  swear  that  ke  doet  absolutely  and  enHreh 
remmmee  ail  aliegianee  and  fidelity  to  every  foreign  prince,  potentate, 
iliJi,  sr  SiMrctfM^f  Now,  the  pope  of  Rome  is  a  mvereign  of  Eu- 
iji|>e--«/iifiil|ii|iilefifa^  issuing  bulls,  laws,  or  briefe,  Simughout 
IM  world :  oileii  to  secure,  augment  and  advance  his  authority,  in 
1aa|iefals,  as  well  as  spirituals ;  as  the  testimony  of  500  Tears  now 
before  you,  amply  demonstrates ;  and  every  Roman  Catholic  lajrmaa 
feeling  a  paiamount  obligation  to  his  bishop,  and  through  him  to  the 
pope ;  and  all  the  rulers  of  the  Reman  Catholic  church,  being  swora 
to  the  pope  absolBlely  and  foierer,  I  ask,  can  such  persons  m  good 
fiuth  solemnly  ewevr  aliegianee  to  this  government !  If  a  person  can 
be  sworn  to  iiip]Mrt  two  antagonist  constitutions,  governments,  powers, 
—two  masters,  as  opposite  as  the  poles :  then  may  he,  without  per- 
jurir,  swear  to  our  government,  and  to  that  of  papal  Rome ! 

But  bishops  are  sworn  "  to  persecute  and  oppme  (penequar  d  im- 

CffHiAeJ  heretics  and  schismatics.    Papal  Rome  is  and  always  has 
en,  a  persecuting  government.    She  is  essentially  so.    I  intend  no4 
now  to  dwell  iMiei  on  this  theme.  But  I  will  sustain  my  prt^Kieition 


SOMAN  CATHOLIC    BBUGION. 


32li 


And  fiist,  I  admit  that  Protestants  have  persecuted,— that  they  have 
perseeutod  even  to  death.  I  deny  it  not ;  and  therefore  my  opponent 
^  not  prove  iL  It  is  a  matter  of  record  indisputable  however, 
that  their  persecutions  have  not  been  as  a  drop  to  the  ocean,  in  compa- 
fhon  of  papal  persecutions.  Still  they  ha^e  persecuted,  and  we  frank- 
ly awn  itl  ^  But  we  have  an  excuse  for  them.  'A  \f  ^^.^^'^f  ,^"^ 
tfter  the  Lutheran  Reformation,  came  out  from  a  bloody  and  cruel 
mother,  who  had  accustomed  them  to  blood  and  slaughter,  and  toughi 
them  that  the  blood  of  heretics  was  a  sacrifice,  most  a^^eP^ble  to 
God.  Thev  were  taught  that  it  was  just  to  destroy  thieves,  rob- 
hers,  and  murderers ;  and  that  heretics  were  the  worst  of  thieves, 
robbers,  and  murderers,  and  ought  when  incorrigible  to  be  slam  for 
no  the  ffood  of  society  did  imperiously  demand.— As  soon  as  they 
cot  out  of  the  great  city,  they  began  to  contend  among  Aemselves, 
wheLr  persecution  was  right,  f  hey  soon  saw  it  was  o?  the  manners 
and  customs  of  Babylon;  and  that  "all  who  take  the  sword  must 
perish  by  the  sword  f"  therefore  they  laid  it  down.  They  have  ab- 
lured  it  in  their  creeds  and  remonstrances  a^inst  the  papacy;  and  we 
'leioiee  to  state  the  fact,  that  there  is  not  m  Protestant  Christendom 
n  single  creed  that  does  not  repudiate  persecuUon  and  assert  the  great 
principle  of  christian  and  religious  liberty.  „^„^, 

^  But  I  have  said  that  papal  ftome  is  essentially  a  persecuting  power 
—still  a  persecuting  monarchy ;  because  she  has  it  yet  written  in  her 
infallible  and  immutiible  decrees  of  councils,  in  the  bulls  and  ana- 
themas  of  her  popes ;  and  in  the  constitution  of  her  m^f^onB,  which 
as  a  church  she  still  acknowledges  and  maintains.     A  feW  ot  her  in- 

fiilUble  decrees  must  be  accepted  as  a  sp^»«je"|- .   ^  ^^  .^^^^^e  holv 

"  io  the  fifth  council  of  Toledo.  Can.  3rd.  the  holy  f^^^Jf "  *«Z,V  ?^*!^^^^ 
council  promulge  thU  sentence,  or  decree  plewing  to  God.  That  wnofw^w 
hafeafter.halltucceedtothekin^om,  shall  "«'?»»"»**?**  *^"\'f  ,!**„" 
t^n  among  other  oaths,  to  permit  no  man  to  hve  in  his  kingdom  who  is  not  a 
SSolic  (Nullum  noa  CathUcum.)  And  if  after  he  has  taken  the  reins  of  gj»- 
JSnment.  he  shaS  violate  thi,  promise,  let  him  be  anathema  ™a™">  hf '"J^^. 
aiX  of  the  eternal  God.  and  become  fuel  for  the  eternal  fire,  (Pabulum  ignit 
leterni.)     Caranra  Sum.  Conciliorum,  p.  404.  .  . 

The  great  Lateran  council  under  Innocent  III.  who  instituted  the  in- 
quisition  and  transubstantiation,  has  still  more  expressly  decreed : 

•*  We  excommunicate,  and  anathematiie  all  heresy,  condemniug  all^heretics. 

bv  what  namea  soever  they  are  called.  *  *         .     „„_:,u^,j 

^The«J  being  condemned,  must  be  left  to  the  secular  P^'^f,  *<>  *»*,P"f ';'„^f  * 
And  Sose  whS  are  only  suspected  of  heresy,  if  they  purge  not  themselves  in  tl.« 
•pm>inted  Zay.  are  to  6e  exc^ununicated,  'and  if  within  a  year  satisfaction  is  not 
riven,  they  are  to  be  condemned  as  heretics.  .„j  „ui. -ii 

^  Thiy  must  take  this  oath.-**  That  they  will  endeavor,  bona  fide,  and  with  aU 
thSrii^rto  extenninatefrom-every  ^  of  their  dominions  all  bere  'c^»  f-b- 
Sects,  universally,  that  are  marked  out  to  them  by  the  church.  So  that  from 
Sis^ime  fo^a  i  when  anyone  is  promoted  to  any  Powertenipomlor  spin  ua^. 
he  shall  be  obliged  to  confirm  this.*^  But  if  any  temporal  o-^' ^^"'ff  TfX"-f 
and  admonishea  by  the  church,  shall  neglect  to  purge  h.s  ''^"^  fr<>"l '^^  «  ^^ 
SSl  ?Uhine...he  sU  be  tied  up  L"!!*- ^^^  :i  tjrZul^^^^^^^^^ 


that  time  pronounce  the  subjects  absolved  fr'*"  »»«&'^"^t  h.^S«  Aidl  V^T- 
his  territories  to  be  seiied  on  by  Catholics,  who  expelling  heretics,  shall  poi- 

■ISurC^lSirwrratfjiken  the  badge  o^he  cross  shall  set  Jem^^^^^^^^ 
O  extirpate  heretics,  shall  enjoy  the  same  indulgence  and  be  fo^'ff  .^J'*'',**'.* 
iLe  prmlege.  at  ii  granted  to  those  who  go  to  the  recovery  of  the  holy  land. 

9C 


I 


J' 


And,  to  mwe  tlnw,  lie  it  empliatlctllj  obterfed,  that  tli«  coomtil  of 
Tteit  fully  establitlied,  adopted,  and  re-mmiilfBd  thane  deefaea,  and 
thejr  are,  at  tliia  moment,  in  Hill  foreeal  Rome.  Until,  then^  m  teneral 
eoancil  is  ealled,  and  maldi  Ikllible  the  deeltiona  of  the  g^at  Lateran 
cooneil;  auch  is,  and  moat  be  the  dictum  and  belief  of  the  Roman 
church ;  and,  aa  I  judgre,  there  never  will  be  another  general  cooneil 
tbia  vil  ever  be  the  doctrine  of  papal  Rome,  till  the  day  of  her  death. 
la  fbis,  I  emp'atically  ask,  the  pnius  and  aplrit  of  republican 
America  f 

But  edicts,  canons,  and  decrees,  are  not  a  dead  letter.    They  havt 
been  all  personified,  and  acted  out  to  the  letter.     Who  has  not  heard 
of  tbtt  personiacation  of  every  thins  that  ia  diabolically  cruel— the 
Holy  Ornci  or  thb  Inqitisitioii  !   What  abuse  of  lan&ruage !    Think 
iot,  my  Mends,  that  I  will  rake  up  its  aahes ;  that  I  will  rehearae  its 
horrible  racks,  and  engines,  and  instniments  of  torture ;  that  I  will 
leaerlbe  a  single  auio  da  /e,  one  of  the  horrid  tragedies  of  the  acts  of 
fidtb,  *hose  flagrance  language  fails  to  speak.    **  It  was  the  vice  of 
the  a|i%*'  my  opponent  has  said.    Of  what  age  1     Of  Innocent  III.  I 
Of  the  era  of  transabstantiation  f     No,  indeed ;  but  of  the  age  of  Na* 
polfM;  of  the  age  of  pope  Pius,  the  saint  of  1814 !  Yes,  of  the  pros- 
•nt afs !    It  was  got  up,  indeed,  by  Innocent  (inapposite  name !)  III., 
and  was  fully  in  operation  in  Italy,  A.  D.  1251.    Its  first  officer,  Do- 
■Inlc,  was  afterwards  made  a  Moini !    In  Spain  and  Portugal  it  waa 
petiiected;  and  ita  reign  of  terror,  in  unfigurative  truth,  transcends  all 
aeacription      My  soul  sickens  at  the  thought.    In  Spain  alone,  from 
1181  to  1814,  about  half  a  million  suffered  by  it.     Lorente  (Paris 
edit.  torn.  ir.  p.  271,)  sets  down  the  victims  of  one  department  of  to^ 
ment,  those  burnt,  at  33,912  \  and  of  other  rigorous  punishments,  at 
iilfdlill.    Me  ia,  by  other  historians,  supposed  to  be  far  below  the 
full  amount    From  the  records  of  the  inouisition,  the  manuscripts 
tsken  fion  the  imiuisitorial  palace  at  Barcelona,  when  taken  by  siege 
ii  ISiS,  one  may  reekon.  that  in  all  Spain,  in  a  little  over  three  centu- 
lies,  half  a  million  Buffered  all  manner  of  cruelties  from  this  infernal 


It  was  oven  employed  aa  a  means  of  converting  the  heathen,  in  pi» 

gM  lands*  It  is  said,  that  800  persons  have  been  condemned  at  one 
aeaalon,  by  one  of  ita  tribunals.  And,  still  worse,  in  Seville,  in  the 
year  1481,  2000  persona  were  condemned  to  the  llamea,  and  20,000 
moie  to  inferior  punishments.  Such  were  the  tender  mercies  of  these 
Roman  gospel  arguments  to  save  men's  souls  from  hell !  It  was  the 
vice  of  a  dark  age,  and  yet  restored  by  Pius  VII.  in  1826! !  What! 

But,  this  is  only  one  of  the  tribunals  -of  persecution :  it  was  only 
•no  of  the  msaiiB  of  persecuting  and  destroying  heretics  and  schis* 
IMiea.  Shall  I  relate  the  persecutions  of  the  Waldenses  and  Albigen* 
as%  and  other  Protestants,  sometimes  called  Lollards,  Wickliffites, 
MigMota,  &e.  &o.?  Shall  I  tell  of  the  milliona  in  France,  Spain, 
Portufsl,  Hdlaiid,  England,  Ireland,  and  elaewheie  I  Shall  I  tell  of 
the  Maaaacro  of  St  Banholomew'a  day!  of  the  persecutions  conse- 
f  ipnt  upon  the  revocation  of  the  edict  of  Nantt  I  or  the  Irish  massa- 
cre! and  of  all  the  other  deeds  of  horror!  I  shall  not  attempt  it  I 
eannot  describe  the  slaughter  of  two  millions,  in  the  early  crusades 
■pdnst  Jews  and  inidela;  nor  of  fifteen  millions  of  Indians  and  pa- 
gaipi  nor  of  a  million  W^aldenses,  murdered  and  banished  in  a  singit 


BtfMAIf   CATHOLIC    BBLIGIOX. 

fsneimtioB .  I  say,  again^  I  eannot  relate  these  heart-stirring  scenes ; 
and  I  shall  only  say,  that  historians  and  martyrologists  variously  give 
the  aggregate  from  fifty  to  tixty^ghi  milliam  cf  human  beings,  thai 
have  been  merifiud  and  devoured  by  this  Moloch ;  this  insatiable  de- 
mon of  persecution,  as  taught  in  theory  and  carried  out  in  practice,  by 
her  who  calls  herself  Holy  Mother  I ! !  What  a  acarlety  crimsoned^ 
true!  mother  she  is !  On  her  will  be  avenged  the  blood  of  all  mavtyra 
Even  the  persecutions  of  those  whom  she  taught  to  persecute,  he  just- 
ly chargeable  against  her.  What  guarantee,  then,  have  we  that  this  be- 
ing the  native  spirit  of  the  system,  it  would  not  again  repeat  the  same 
tragic  scenes,  in  any  country  where  it  obtains  an  ascendancy  !  Tis 
true,  indeed,  that  the  Protestant  powers  in  Europe  hold  it  now  m 
check.  But  were  these  removed,  from  what  premises  would  we  in- 
fer, that  the  same  means  would  not  be  resorted  to  in  this  and  every 
Protestant  country,  so  soon  as  this  kind  mother  should  feel  it  a  duty, 
"  to  extirpate  heresy*^  out  of  the  land  1 !  ^ 

The  doctrine  is  actually  tauffht  in  her  New  Testament,  in  the  no,-*# 
appended  to  the  Rhemish  version.    I  will  give  you  a  passage  or  two. 

''rAod  when  his  di«ciple8  Jamei  aad  John  had  seen  it,  they  said.  Lord  wilt  thou 
we  say  that  lire  come  down  from  heaven,  and  consume  them?  And  turning,  he 
rebuked  them,  saying,  you  know  not  of  what  spirit  you  are.**     Luke  ix.  54, 55. 

"  Ver.  55.  He  rebuked  them.  Not  justice  nor  all  rigorous  punishmeol  of 
•innen  it  here  forbidden,  Elias'  ft«t  reprehended,  nor  the  church  or  chris- 
liao  princes  blamed  for  putting  heretics  to  death:  but  that  none  of  these  >hould 
be  done  for  desire  of  our  particular  revenge,  or  without  discretion,  and  regard 
to  their  amendment,  and  example  to  others.  Therefore,  Peter  used  his  power 
upon  Ananias  and  Sapphira,  when  he  struck  them  both  down  to  death  for  ifc 
frmtding  the  church."    Rhem.  N.  Test.  p.  109.  ^   ci        ^  •      j 

This  is  a  mistake.    Peter  struck  not  Ananias  and  Sapphira  tor  tfe 
frttuding  the  chnreh,  (as  these  purblind  commentators  say  Q  but  the 
Lord  himself  struck  them  dead,  for  lying  against  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Christian  princes,  thus,  in  reading  the  Roman  Testament,  are  taught 

to  put  heretics  to  death.  . 

"And  many  of  them  that  had  followed  curious  things,  brought  together  Uieir 
books  and  burnt  them  before  all :  and  counting  the  prices  of  them,  they  fottiid  tb« 
■loney  to  be  fifty  thousand  pence."  Acts  x\%.  19.  »,     .  t.  j  u     l 

'•  Ver.  19.  BookM.  A  christian  man  is  bound  to  born  or  deface  all  wicked  iMwkt 
of  what  sort  soever,  especially  heretical  books.  Which  though  they  infect  not 
him  always  that  keepeth  them,  vet  being  forth  coming,  they  may  be  boisoim 
and  pernicious  to  other  that  shall  have  them  and  read  them  after  his  death,  or 
otherwise.  Therefore  hath  the  church  taken  order  for  condemning  all  such 
books,  and  against  the  reading  of  them  where  danger  may  ensue:  and  ihechrit- 
tian  emperors,  ConatMitiU8,Magnus,  Valentinian.  Theodosius,  Marcian.  Justin- 
ian, made  penal  laws  for  the  burning  or  defacing  them."    lb.  p.  207. 

This  proscription  of  beietical  books  is  of  the  same  spirit,  a  prt  of 
the  same  system,  and  explains  the  march  of  papistical  uniformity  and 

iinitv  ^ 

"  As  we  have  taid  before,  so  now  I  say  again,  if  anv  evmngeiixe  to  yoo,  betide 
that  which  you  have  received,  be  he  anathema."    Gal.  i.  9. 

»'  Hierome  useth  this  place,  wherein  the  apostle  givcth  the  cune,  or  ana- 

Iheraa  to  all  false  teachers,  not  once,  but  twice,  to  prove  that  the  zeal  of  Catholic 
men  ought  to  be  so  great  toward  all  heretics,  and  their  doctrines,  that  they 
should  rive  them  the  anathema,  though  they  were  never  so  dear  unto  them. 
In  which  case,  satth  this  holy  Doctor,  I  would  not  spare  mine  own  parentt."  Id. 

^  This  is  stronger  still.    "  I  would  not  spare  mine  own  parents  !' 
This  is  the  spirit,  the  naked  spirit  of  the  system,  pure  and  unmixed. 
V'jmember,  then,  my  friends,  that  childrei  ought  to  inform  agaiiiat 


.TB  Olf  THX 


i 


HfMt 
OS§G 

* 

tMr  mm  fmraits,  tnd  brother  against  lirotbcr,  for  th«  eitirftitjon  4 

**  And  I  iMr  the  woman  dranken  of  tlie  blood  of  the  Saintt  and  of  the  blood 
©f  the  warty  rt  of  Jetaa.**    Rev.  xvii.  6. 

Fkr.  6.  DrmMkmn  of  the  blood.  It  h  platn,  that  this  wotnan  siniiiteth  tho 
whole  corps  of  ail  the  persecutors  that  have  and  shall  shed  so  much  blood  of 
the  juat :  of  the  prophets,  apostles,  and  other  martyrs,  from  the  beginning  of 
tha  iroffM  In  th«  m.  The  Protestants  poMibly  expound  it  of  Rome,  for  that 
th^  pal  faflMtiet  to  death,  and  allow  of  their  punishment  in  other  countries  ; 
Bat  their  blood  is  not  called  the  blood  of  saints,  no  more  than  the  blood  of 
fhievett  mankillers,  and  other  malefactors:  for  the  shedding  of  which  by  order 
of  fostice.  no  commonmealtk  shall  mmwer"     Id.  p.  430. 

No  commonwealth,  con8ef|iieiitlj  no  member  of  it,  shall  sufler  for 
<illieg  heretics.  If  I  have  not  soalained  this  proposition,  I  can  prove 
notbiof.  If  theae  faets  and  documents  can  be  set  aside  b]r  rhetorical 
deelasatioB,  or  reckless  denial ;  then  are  history,  and  testimony,  and 
Iwit  #f  mo  value  in  controversy. 

Anmlier  specification  comes  under  this  propoaition.  I  have  too  many 
of  tbem  for  the  occasion.  I  must  be  brief.  This  is  the  divorcing,  re- 
IMlliaf ,  diaorganizinor,  and  demoralizing  dogma,  that  '*  no  faith  3uhM 
mkepi  with  herdieM,*^ 

Gregorv  YII.,  in  a  council  at  Rome,  declares : 

**  We  tbllowing  the  statutes  of  our  predecessors,  do,  by  our  iqwitfolic  author- 
ity, «Ajoiliiall  those  from  their  mik  oi  idelity,  who  are  bound  to  excommmd^ 
ciM  fiffitiif .  either  by  duty  or  oath;  and  we  unloose  them  from  everr  tie  of 
alMdieaoe,  till  the  excomiuunicated  petions  have  made  proper  satis&ction.** 
PeCMl.  t  part.  cans.  15.  quest.  6. 

Urban  II.  teaches  the  same  doctrine : 

**  You  aro  to  discharge  the  soldiers  who  have  tieorn  JIdtUhf  to  count  Hugo 
from  payiag  ■■/  obedience  while  he  is  ^xfommunieated:  for  they  are  not  obli^ 
la  Im||  that  ideli^  iaviolate,  which  they  have  «icom  fo  a  christian  prime,  who 


Ood^  mmd  his  smints,  and  despises  their  precepts."    Ibid. 
Clfegory  IX  has  laid  down  the  general  principle,  with  the  greatest 

^■^^aii^i'  aswaiMi    ■'a  ^^'iM'BiaPBnMFMii  # 

''Be  it  Inown  to  all  who  are  under  the  dominion  of  htrsHes,  that  they  are 
sal  ioaa  from  every  tit  ofjidelityonddutyjo  them;  all  oaths  or  soUmn  agree* 
aimf  to  the  eomlmtj  notwithstanding."    l>ecret.  Greg.  lib.  5,  tit  7. 

Hear  now  the  decree  of  the  council  of  Constance,  in  the  case  of 
lofam  Huse,  and  Jerome  of  Prague ;  who  appeared  there  under  the 
MililM  f  Mgo  of  the  imperial  proteetion. 

^**  Coaacii  of  Constance,  1414.  did  solemnly  decree  that  no  faith  it  to  be  kept 
with  am  heretic.  The  person  who  has  given  them  the  safe  conduct  tu  come 
Hotter,  shall  not  in  this  ease  be  obliged  to  keep  his  promise  by  whatever  tie  he 
ai^y  have  been  enmed,  when  he  baa  done  all  that  has  been  in  his  power  to  do.** 
B^racc.  Frae^  Thouiiit,  p.  110. 

TIm  oonneil  of  Conalance  them,  not  only  to  decided ;  but  cauied 
ilHae  men,  who  appiiiied  before  them  under  an  imperial  pledge,  to  be 
ialMi  and  burned,  llius  faith  waa  not  to  be  kept  with  heretics  accord- 
iiftotud  decree,  and  the  practice  under  it  by  these  "  holyfaihera  !*' 

TO  eonirm  the  whole  with  the  utmost  brevity  I  would  add,  the  ho- 
ly, iiiliillible,  and  last  council  of  Trent  formally  recognized  this  de- 
cree of  the  council  of  Constance.  It  is  then  the  standing  and  unrepealed 
doctrine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  which  must  be  as  immutable 
and  imUlible  as  the  council  of  Trent. 

Next  we  must  notice  the  proscription  of  hooka  as  another  specifi 

Tim  council  of  Trent  in  its  WSk  session,  decreed  that  a  council 
liier  At  pope  thouM  draw  np  and  publish  an  index  of  books  which 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    1BU6I0N. 

to  be  prohibited  in  the  church,    l^ua  commenced  and  keeping 

pace  with  the  introduction  of  liberal,  or  Protestant,  or  anti-Romaa 
Catholic  volumes  it  has  grown  into  a  respectable  volume ;  so  that 
orie  of  the  finest  libraries  might  be  collected  out  of  these  proscribed 
books.  Among  these  is  the  bible,  which  is  said  to  have  been  the 
first  prohibited  in  the  council  of  Toloso.  In  the  4th  of  the  10  rules 
concerning  prohibited  books  established  by  the  Holy  Fathers  of  the 
council  of  Trent,  a  license  to  read  the  bible  is  put  into  the  control  of 
bishops  and  inquisitors.  But  he  that  presumes  to  «*read  without 
such  license  cannot  receive  absolution  of  sins."  Among  theseprohib- 
itcd  books  also  are  those  of  Locke,  Milton,  Bacon,  Grotius,  Galileo, 
Claude,  Saorin,  Sir  Matthew  Hale,  Jeremy  Taylor,  Luther,  CaMn, 
Melapcthon, — and,  indeed,  all  the  standard  Protestant  authors. 

Touching  the  liberty  of  the  press,  a  decree  of  the  10th  session  of 
the  Lateran  council  A.  D.  1215,  even  Leo  X.  presiding  expresses  the 
Roman  Catholic  views  of  that  chief  root  of  the  tree  of  liberty.  The 
decree  of  the  Lateran  council  waa  sanctioned  by  Trent  and  is  now  the 

orthodox  faith  of  Rome. 

"  By  order  of  the  holy  council,  we,  in  fine,  ordain  and  decree,  that  no  person 
shall  presume  to  print,  cr  canse  to  be  printed,  any  book  or  other  writing  whatso- 
ever, either  in  our  city  (Rome)  or  in  any  other  cities  and  dioceses,  unless  it  shall 
fint  have  been  carffally  examined,  if  in  this  city,  by  our  Vicar  and  the  master  of 
the  holy  palace,  or  if  in  other  cities  and  dioceses,  by  the  bishop  or  his  deputy, 
wUhthe  inquisitor  of  heretical  pravily  for  the  diocese,  in  which  the  said  impret- 
iion  is  about  to  be  made  ;  and  unless  also  it  shall  have  received,  under  their  own 
hand,  their  written  approval,  given  withont  price  and  without  delay.  Whoso- 
ever shall  presume  to  do  otherwise,  besides  the  loss  of  the  books,  which  shall 
lie  publicly  burned,  shall  be  bound  by  the  sentence  of  excommnnicaiion.** 
iJaranza,  p.  670.  *     ,       *        *  *  »         -w 

The  council  of  Trent  has  also  confirmed  the  doctrine  of  Leo  X, 
and  his  Lateran  council  of  1515.  Their  first  rule  concerning  pro- 
scribed books  is  :  AU  books  condemned  hy  the  supreme  pontiffs^  or  gen» 
eral  eouneib  before  the  year  1615  and  not  comprised  in  the  praeni  index 
are  condemned,^*  The  creed  of  this  said  council  of  Trent  moreove; 
compels  every  Roman  Catholic  **  to  receive  undoubtedly,  all  things 
delivered,  defined,  and  declared  by  the  sacred  canons,  and  general  councils 
andparticularly  hy  the  Holy  council  of  TVenf." 

This  church  is  as  much  opposed  to  the  freedom  of  the  press  and 
free  discussion,  and  the  circulation  of  the  bible,  as  ever  she  was ;  but 
she  has  to  yield  a  little  to  thai  irresistible  innovator,  called  custom. 
Still  however  a  Roman  bishop  cannot,  as  a  good  and  liege  subject  of 
the  pope,  but  oppose,  freedom  of  thou^t,  8p««ch  and  action  in  ail 
matters  religious.  Listen  to  the  following  little  bull  of  the  bishop 
•f  New  York,  published  the  other  day  ag^.iinst  free  discussion. 

In  this  document  the  bishop  writes,  in  his  address  to  the  editor  of  the  **  Truth 
Teller,"—"  Sir,  I  consider  it  my  duty  to  request  you  to  publish  the  following 
copy  of  my  letter  to  the  editor  of  the  "  Catholic  Diary,"  in  order  to  obviate  as 
soon  as  possible,  the  mt*c/iie/| which  such  a  Society,  if  countenanced,  might  pro- 
duce, you  know  my  opposition  to  controversial  disputes  on  religion,  particular- 
ly in  debating  societies  or  newspapers." 
From  the  letter  alluded  to.  we  extract  the  following  : 
"To  the  Editor  of  the  Catholic  Diary  :—  -   ,         .     • 

In  the  Catholic  Diary  of  Saturday  last,  October  1, 1  find  a  notice  from  yon,  of 
a  Societv,  calling  itself  the  New-York  Catholic  Society,  for  the  promotion  of 
religious  knowledge.  Of  the  existence  of  that  Society,  I  was  itterly  ignorant, 
and  feel  surprised  that  you.  who  ought  to  know  better,  would  think  of  encour- 
aging and  drawing  public  attention  to  such  a  society,  without  first  ascertaining 
the  teotimenta  of  your  Ordinary  oa  to  important  a  tabject.  The  Church  wisely 
Sc2  42 


ON 

tliftt  nothinr  of  tlM  latan  of  tltii  toeiety  cui  Im  Mtablitbed  witlioat  tfia 

Sirobatbo  of  the  Bisliop  of  tiM  IMoCMe,  where  it  it  ■wt  to  introdttce  it,  and 
t  pennittMl,  it  ■hould  be  TOverned  by  such  rales  and  regulfttioBi  as  to  him  niav 
lacin  proper,  for  it  obviousfy  partakes  of  the  natnre  of  a  Theological  schooL 
Far  be  it  from  me  to  impede  the  pnif  retsof  religiovi  knowledge  ;  nothing  could 
be  more  dear  to  mj  heart  than  to  enconrage  whatever  contributes  effectuall;^  to 
Us  ppooiotioa  i  bat  placed  as  I  am,  as  a  sentinel  over  the  sacred  ark  of  religion, 
It  itair  iapnmiTa  anij  to  prevent  it  from  being  touched  by  pro&ne  or  nnprac- 


SOMAN   CATROUC    BBLIGION. 


sai 


viewing  this  society  in  the  light  you  see  it,  it  is  my  decided  con- 
ficiion  that  it  ought  not  to  be  sanctioned  l^  me  ;  how  can  it  be  supposed  that 
jmmif  men,  whoae  education  is  chiefly  mercantile  or  mechanical,  can  come  with 
■Milcient  preparation  to  the  discussion  of  a  question  that  requires  vast  erudition, 
will  m  dei|Mn  of  research,  which  they  cannot  possess  ;  you  cannot  be  ignorant 
of  tho  awnfi  iMntal  discipline  to  which  students  are  subjected  in  our  Theologi- 
cal Semiaariea,  before  they  are  allowed  to  commence  the  study  of  theology. 
Toa  know  alto  thnt  this  study  is  r^;ulated  by  experienced  and  able  professors, 
HhI  young  men  are  not  allowed  to  ^pe  their  wav  with  only  their  own  feeble 
lUfl,  Ihf CMU^  the  dark  maies  of  deceitfiil  cnvil,  ana  infidel  sophistry. 

^Hm  members  of  this  iocjet}  .  who  thirst  so  much  for  religious  knowledge,  can 
imd  iMr  elementary  works,  ant.  also,  the  masterly  productions  of  Milner,  Fletch- 
'OtJ'— — itt't  iiitofy  of  the  Variations,  lately  prmted,  and  others,  where  they 
■n  aare  to  ind  the  tenets  of  our  faith  explained  with  a  precision  and  elegsnce 
ilnl  onnnot  lail  to  aatiify  Iho  sincere  inquirer  after  truth.  The  precision  of 
iiiiM,  and  elegance  of  eipfeasion  in  the  imparting  of  religious  knowledge,  theii 
ptiMMble  sets  forth  to  be  the  main  objects  of  this  society,  and  it  covers  the  destrt 
and  intention  of  acquiring  that  species  of  tact  and  de&terity  in  theological  de» 
hiie,  which  would  enable  them  to  fbllofr  into  the  arena  the  lanatics  of  the 
dny.  All  this  I  must  condemn  as  well  as  a  publication  of  the  crude  essays  of 
^voi  among  us.    Let  us  dispute  leas  and  practice  more. 

The  church  in  the  most  positive  manner  prohibits  all  laymen  from  entering 
iBllldis|Mite  on  points  of  religion  with  sectarians,  **  inhibenius,'*  says  Pope  Alex 
■■lloff  IV.,  **  ne  nnipMl  Laioai  Forsonoi  liceat  pablice  vel  private  de  fide  Catholi 
on  di^ptttare  ;  qui  vera  contradicerit,  E&communicationis  laqueo  innodetur."* 
Waifim  MCollected  this  sentence,  I  am  sure  you  would  be  tor  from  calling  on 
the  Cfatholic  young  men  of  this  cily  to  become  members  of  a  debating  society 
••  retigioos  subiects,  open  to  so  many  serious  objections. 

••  + John,  Bishop  of  New-York." 

After  hariiif  read  you  a  ^tf^''*  Ml  against  ^  The  New  York 
OailiNilk  aoctety  for  the  promotion  of  relipous  knowledge,"  I  wii, 
while  on  this  subject,  read  you  also  a  bithop't  curse  against  a  refrac- 
logf  priest  in  Philadelphia.  I  quote  it  from  one  of  the  News-papers 
•jf  that  day.  It  happened  some  twelte  or  fifteen  years  ago.  I  have 
■eteral  such  cases  in  the  books  around  me :  but  they  are  some  two  or 
three  centuries  old,  and  in  foreign  countries ;  and  therefore,  I  select  this 
modem  one  which  is  almost  a  copy  of  them,  because  a  little  acclimated, 

[Ami  •  #fcttodfjp*tn  PmMtr.J  We  hnve  at  length  obtained  n  correct  copy 
of  the  eacooHMMivatton  of  W  ilCam  Hogan,  Pastor  of  St.  Mary's  Church,  of  tnis 
city*    It  is  at  fellows: 

By  the  authority  of  Ood  Almighty,  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  and  the 
nndeliled  Virgin  Mary,  mother  ana  patroness  of  our  Savior,  and  of  all  celea- 
tinl  virtues.  Angels,  Archnngels,  Thrones,  Dominions,  Powers,  Cherubims  and 
Sicaphims;  anoof  all  the  Holy  Patiiarchs,  Prophets,  and  of  all  the  Apostles  and 
IStaagelists  of  the  Holy  Innocents,  who,  in  the  sight  of  the  Holy  Lamb  are 
ilNiiMr  worthy  to  sing  the  new  song  of  the  Holy  Mulyrs  and  Hoiv  Confiissort, 
and  of  all  the  Holy  Viigins,  and  of  all  Saints,  together  with  the  Holy  Elect  of 
God— amy  he,  Wuliam  liogaat  be  damned. 

We  excommunicate  and  annthematise  him,  and  from  the  threshold  of  the  Hofy 
Church  of  God  Almighty,  we  sequester  him,  that  he  may  be  tormented,  disposed 


and  be  delivered  over  with  Athan  and  Abiram,  and  with  thorn  who  lay  unto  the 
Lord,  •  depart  from  us  for  we  desire  none  of  thy  ways ;"  as  a  fire  is  quenched  with 
water,  so  l«t  the  light  of  him  be  pot  out  forevermore,  unless  it  shall  repent  him, 
and  naake  satisfiiction.    Amen! 

May  the  Father,  who  created  man,  curse  him !  May  the  Son,  who  suffered  for 
ns,  curse  him !  May  the  Hloly  Ghost,  who  suffered  for  us  in  baptism,  curse  him  I 
May  the  Holy  Cross  which  Christ  for  our  salvation,  triumphing  over  bis  enemies, 
ascended,  curse  him ! 

Miyr  the  Holy  and  Eternal  Virgin  Mary,  mother  of  God,  curse  him !  May  St.  Mi- 
chael, the  Advocate  of  the  Holy  Souls,  curse  him,  May  all  the  angels,  prmcipali- 
ties,  and  powers,  and  all  heavenly  armies,  corse  him ! 

May  the  praiseworthy  multitude  of  Patriarchs,  and  Prophets,  curse  him! 

May  St.  John  th^  Precursor,  and  St.  John  the  Baptist,  and  St.  Peter,  and  St 
Paul,  and  St.  Andrew,  and  all  other  of  Chrift's  Apostles  together,  curse  him!  and 
may  the  rest  of  our  Disciples  and  Evangelists,  who  by  their  preaching  converted 
tlie  universe,  and  the  holy  and  wonderful  company  of  Martyrs  and  Confessor, 


*  'Tiie  EaglM  of  which  MmU  .Is :— **  The  Chureli  |proh.lhilS'  la. 
privatflljr,  fra«  arc ainf  on  Bnl||acla  sppertainine  to  the  Oailiotie 

4IWP"   MNnHni  ap^p^  ■PSiwuHmPWi   ^w  nwisp  wsn^w  nffiws  ws  ^iwi 


n,  either  fNibUdy  er 

ith,  and  wbeaaavef  shal 


to  everlasting  ages,  who  are  found  to  be  beloved  of  God,  damn  him! 

May  he  be  damned  wherever  he  be,  whether  in  the  house  or  in  the  stable,  the 
garden  or  the  field,  or  the  highways;  or  in  the  woods, or  in  the  waters,  or  in  the 
church;  may  he  be  cursed  in  living  and  in  dying! 

May  he  be  cursed  i*t  eating  and  in  drinking,  m  being  hungry,  in  being  thirsty, 
in  fasting,  in  sleeping,  •«.  slumbering,  and  in  sitting,  in  livmg,  in  working,  in 
resting  and  blood  letting! 
May  he  be  cursed  in  all  the  faculties  of  his  body. 

May  he  be  cursed  inwardly  and  outwardly;  may  he  be  cursed  in  his  bnuns 
and  in  bis  vertex,  in  his  temples,  in  his  eye-brows,  in  his  cheeks,  in  his  jaw  bones, 
in  his  nostrils,  in  his  teeth  and  grinders,  in  his  lifi  in  his  throat,  in  his  ahoulders, 
in  his  arms,  in  his  fingers. 

May  he  be  damned  in  his  mouth,  in  his  breasts,  in  his  heart  and  purtenance, 
down  to  the  very  stomach!  .      .  .    , 

May  he  be  cursed  in  his  reins  and  in  his  groins;  in  his  thighs,  in  hii  genitals 
and  in  his  hips,  and  his  knees,  his  legs  and  feet,  and  toe  nails! 

May  he  be  cursed  in  all  his  joints,  and  articulation  of  the  members;  from  the 
crown  of  his  head  to  the  sole  of  his  feet,  may  there  be  no  soundness. 

May  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  with  all  the  glory  of  his  majesty,  curse  him! 
And  may  heaven  with  all  the  powers  that  move  therein,  rise  up  against  him  and 
curse  and  damn  him;  unless  he  repent  and  make  satis&ction! 
Amen.     So  be  it.    Be  it  so.    Amen. 

Ridiculcus  as  this  may  appear — ^laughable  or  profane  ;  it  is  never- 
^eless,  but  the  echo  of  one  of  the  one  hundred  anathemas  com- 
manded in  the  council  ot  Trent — one  of  the  greater  excommunications 
due  to  an  obstinate  heretic. 

As  still  more  indicative  of  the  present  views  and  feelings  of  the 
Roman  see,  on  the  subject  of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  I  shall  give 
you  a  few  more  extracts.  1  had  laid  off  several  modern  documents 
of  much  point,  and  bearing  on  this  proposition ;  but  unfortunately, 
they  were  misplaced  in  my  library,  and  I  find  them  missing  Among  the 
books  I  have  brought  with  me.  I  hold  in  my  hand,  liowover,  a  little 
work  in  which  I  find  some  of  them.  This  little  volume  containing 
**  Dr.  Beecher's  Plea  for  the  West,"  ought  to  be  in  every  family,  and 
read  by  every  adult  in  the  great  valley,  who  feels  an^  interest  in  the 
preservation  of  our  free  and  happy  institutions,  I  wish  I  had  time  to 
lead  much  of  it.  I  can  only  read  a  few  passages  of  the  documentary 
daia  which  it  contains : 

I  am  about  to  read  from  Gregory  XVI.  the  present  succe*?sor  of  Pe- 
ter, under  date  of  1832,  the  present  faith  of  Roman  Catholics  on  the 
fubject  of  conscience,  and  liberty  of  the  press. 
"From  this  polluted  fountatu  of  iudiOlreiice,  ilows  that  absurJ  an-J  erroneous 


<  n>i 


DBBATC   ON'   THS 


SOMAN   CATUOUC    BELIOION. 


333 


) 


dbctri'iic,  or  nllMr  raving,  in  fiiror  mi  4il— n  of*'ltta%i»f  efMMQkcM/lw 
which  moH  ptetlkntial  error,  the  eomm  It  ofWiMl  fiwr  'Ihit  •■lira  wid  wild  lib- 
mtfotmiimmt  which  it  every  where  tttempting  the  overthrow  of  religk><N  md 
civil  imtiliations;  and  which  the  uobluibing  impudence  of  tooM  hH  held  forth 
••  HH  dlTmiitare  to  religion.  Hence  thai  fest,  of  all  othsrg  moff  ft  be  drtmdtd 
im  m  •!■<€,  umridkd  ItAtrly  tfapwdom^  IkentioutneM  of  ipeech,  «nd  lutt  of  no- 
vtltj,  which.  Mccording  to  the  experience  of  ell  sees,  portend  the  downhill  of 
th«  most  powerful  and  tfonrishinr  empires.  "  Hither  tends  that  worst  and  ■«• 
ver  snlficientlj  to  be  execrated  and  detested  ubertt  or  THE  pmsn  for  the  dif« 
fusion  of  all  manner  of  writings,  which  some  lo  loudly  contend  lor,  and  so  ac- 
lively  nmnote.**   p.  121. 

Tlii  so  Hesli  from  Rome,  stamped  with  the  seal  oi  infyiibiltty, 
withoiit  another  word,  sustains  that  specification  in  my  proposition 
relating  to  the  anti-American  spirit  and  genius  of  the  grand  elementt 
of  jpupeiy* 
But  eootinues  he  on  the  subject  of  unlicensed  books : 
**Jio  ipeaaa  must  be  here  omitted,  says  CIrmeni  Xlil.,  oar  predecessor  of 
happy  BMiMyry,  in  tfie  Encvclical  Letter  on  the  proscription  of  bad  books — 'no 
meant  mtut  he  here  omitted^'  as  the  extremity  of  the  case  calls  for  all  oar  exer- 
iMMMi  lo  MlirmtiMilc  the  JmUd  9e$t  which  spreads  through  so  many  works;  nor 
CM  m mtarials  of  error  be  of  Acrwiti  dc«frof  id  lAnii  6y  the  flames,  which  con- 
some  the  depraved  elements  of  the  evil.** 

The  secretanr  of  the  court  of  Vienna  and  counsellor  of  legation — ^1 

neu  FiedericK  Schlegel,  who,  in  1828,  lectured  on  the  (vhilosophy 
•if  iiittoiy  in  iiiYor  of  monarchy  and  popery— one  supreme  bishop,  and 
0110  fnpmiie  auMiarch — ^who  was  one  of  the  Austrian  cabinet,  the  eon' 
Jkkntimi  eoumeihr  qi  Prince  Mdkrmeh — ^whose  policy  and  opinion) 
opened  llie  way  for  Austrian  efforts  on  the  foundation  of  St.  Leopold, 
til  add  Anieiiea  to  the  pope's  dominions — ^I  say,  of  this  great  man  and 
Ms  oninlons,  the  author  of  a  foreign  conspiracy,  as  quoted  by  Ooct<» 
Beedier,  thus  spedks : 

**In  the  rear  1828  the  celebrated  Frederick  Schtegel,  one  of  the  m^st  dis> 
timgiilihed  lilefary  men  of  Europe,  delivered  lectures  at  Vienna,  on  the  philoso- 
ph|  of  hiflorjr,  (which  have  not  been  translated  into  English)  a  great  object  of 
which  it  to  loow  ^ewmimimffoH  mkkh  p<^eiy  mnd  monarch^f  derive  from 
caeh  Other.  He  conmieiidi  the  two  systems  in  connexion  as  deserving  of  uni- 
ranal  ffaeeption.  Hoallampts  to  prove  that  the  sciences,  and  arts,  and  all  tba 
pmnitt  of  nan,  as  an  intellectual  being,  aro  best  promoted  under  this  perfect 
system  of  church  and  state:  a  pope  at  the  head  of  the  former;  an  emperor  at  the 
head  of  the  latter.  He  contrasts  with  this,  the  system  of  Protestantism;  repre- 
aenta  Piroteatantism  as  the  enemy  of  good  government,  as  the  ally  of  republican- 
ism,  as  the  parent  of  the  distreiies  of  Europe,  ai  the  cauie  of  all  the  disorders 
with  which  legitimate  governmenti  are  afflrted.  In  the  clote  of  lecture  17th, 
¥ol.  II.  p.  m,  ho  thai  apeaks  of  this  country:  The  TRUE  NUBSBRY  ^oil 
ihem  detlrmtim  primemhe,  the  rewbUionary  school  for  France  and  the  rest  ^ 
Emwf§9  hm  heem  JVWii  Amtriem,  Thenee  the  evil  ha*  eprutd  over  numy  other 
hmitt  ^ker  Af  luilimil  confiyMm,  or  by  arHtrmry  eommiumemtion.    Ih.  p.  12t, 

Such  are  the  popular  Tiews  of  our  institutions  in  the  best  and  purest 
ebureh  district  in  the  world  :  and  the  emigrants  of  that  country  with 
Ifcosfi  opinions  are  daily  crowding  to  our  shores,  and  filling  up  this 
inunense  Talley.  These  are  they  who  are  taught  to  execrate  the  lib- 
iity  of  the  press,  and  to  consider  liberty  of  conscience  pestilential  er* 
lor,  and  that  a  spiritual  monarch,  and  a  political  emperor  are  the  Tery 
paragon  of  all  excellence  in  church  and  state.  Is  this  compatible  with 
the  genius  of  our  institutions  ?  Are  not  such  Tiews  and  reasonings, 
pimiiveiy  auftversise  tfikem? 

Let  me  observe  from  that  book  of  Fessenden's  of  which  my  oppo- 
Mat  'Seemed  tO'  know  so  m'ooh  yesteiday :  but  the  author  of  whieh  hm 


oaanot  now  name,  as  I  believe,  (if  he  can,  howerer,  he  may  tell  us 
something  about  him) — I  say  from  the  Encyclopedia  of  Religious 
Knowledge,  and  from  some  omer  documents  before  me,  I  would  wish 
to  read  a  few  statements,  to  show  that  this  said  Roman  Catholic  In- 
stitution, chameleon  like,  first  accommodates  itself  to  the  customs  of 
every  country,  and  seems  to  inhale  and  exhale  tlie  popular  atmosphere 
until  it  reaches  its  end  ;  (for  well  the  Jesuit  knows  the  means  may  be 
infinitely  various,  while  the  end  is  one  and  immutable,)  and  so  soon  as 
It  gains  the  fulcrum  of  popular  opinion  and  the  lever  of  the  majority, 
if  builds  up  an  empire,  after  the  model  of  the  Prince  Metternich.  This 
has  hitherto  been  its  history,  in  every  climate,  and  country,  and  age. 
A  single  example  of  this  policy,  taken  from  the  Encyclopedia,  must 

suffice : 

*•  Various  attempts  have  been  made  to  bring  this  church  under  the  papal  yoke: 
but  without  success.  The  Portuguese  having  opened  a  passage  into  Abyssinia  in 
the  fifteenth  century,  an  emissary  was  sent  to  extend  the  inthience  and  authority 
of  the  Roman  pontiff,  clothed  with  the  title  of  patriarch  of  the  Abyssinians.  The 
lame  important  comniission  was  afterwards  given  to  several  Jesuits,  when  some 
circumstances  seemed  to  promise  them  a  successful  and  happy  ministry;  but  the 
Abysiinians  stood  so  firm  to  the  faith  of  their  ancestors,  that  towards  the  close  of 
the  sixteenth  century  the  Jesuits  had  lost  nearly  all  hope  in  that  quarter. 

About  the  beginnmgof  tbe  seventeenth  century  the  Portuguese  lesu its  renew- 
ed the  mission  to  Abyssinia,  when  the  emperor  created  one  of  them  patriarch; 
and  not  only  swore  allegiance  to  the  Roman  pontift',  but  also  oblipd  his  subjects 
to  forsake  the  rites  and  tenets  of  their  ancestors,  and  to  embrace  the  doctrine  and 
worship  of  the  Romish  church.  At  length  the  emperor  became  so  exasperated 
at  the  arrogant  and  violent  proceedings  of  the  patriarch  in  subverting  the  es- 
tablished customs  of  the  empire,  for  the  purpose  of  confirroine  the  pope's  au- 
thoritv,  especially  in  imposing  celibacy  on  some,  and  requiring  divorce  of  others, 
who  had  married  more  than  one  wife,  that  he  annulled  the  orders  formerly  given 
in  favor  of  popery,  banished  the  inissionariea  out  of  his  dominions,  and  trea'ed 
with  the  utmost  severity  all  who  had  any  connexion  with  the  undertakinff.  From 
this  period  the  very  name  of  Rome,  its  religion,  and  its  pontiff,  have  all  along 
been  objects  of  peculiar  aversion  among  the  Abyssinians/' — Encyc.  Relig. 
Knowl.  p.  22. 

Thus  have  the  Jesuits  done  in  every  country,  and  this  will  they  do 
— first  ingratiate  themselves  with  the  people,  and  when  they  think 
they  are  secure  of  their  object,  they  will  proceed  to  subvert  the  gov- 
ernment :  for  they  are  sworn  and  sold  to  the  pope  forever. 

The  gentleman  says,  We  are  both  foreignera ;  indicating  that  we 
have  equal  rights  and  privileges.  I  did  not  use  that  term  in  an  invi- 
dious sense,  when  speaking  of  my  willingness  to  receive  foreigners. 
Nor  do  I  oppose  the  principles  of^my  opponent,  because  of  their  hos- 
tility to  Protestants  only :  but  because  of  their  hostility  to  Roman 
Catholics.  It  is  from  my  views  of  the  political  and  religious  bear- 
ings, the  temporal  and  the  eternal  consequences  of  the  system,  that  1 
expose  and  oppose  it.  As  a  philanthropist,  I  am  rpposed  to  the  papal 
empire,  whether  at  home  or  abroad — in  Europe  or  America. 

But  although  politically  considered,  in  one  sense,  we  both  may  he 
called  foreigners ;  yet,  we  are  not  foreigners  in  the  same  sense.  I 
claim  a  very  intimate  relation  with  the  Protestant  family.  I  am  one 
of  that  family.  It  was  then  my  family,  that  first  settled  this  country. 
The  bishop's  family  settled  Roman  Catholic  America.  He  is  a  for- 
eigner here,  as  I  would  be  a  foreigner  in  Mexico  or  South  America.  I 
belong  to  the  persecuted — ^he  to  the  persecutors  of  that  family. 

In  the  next  place,  I  never  took  but  one  oath  of  allegiance.  I  never 
ffowsd  to  support  but  one  political  constitution.    My  opponent  first 


8M 


IIIBATK  Olff  TBS 


tvofe  to  America  and  ttieo  to  Rome.  He  is  bonnd  to  a  fonim  ]  lims: 
I  in  not.  If  that  ptiiice  shodd  reward  him  for  any  senrlee  with  a 
€afilnal*s  eap,  lie  migiit  be  commanded  away  to  Rome  next  week. 

lienor  PviciLL.    No,  I  will  not  leiie  this  country. 

Mb.  Campbbll.  The  gentleman  is  under  the  "  Holy  Lord  liio 
fiilie.''    I  am  not  a  foreigner  in  thi«  sense. 

But  still  better,  I  am  the  father  of  a  family :  my  children  ire  natiTt 
AmerMans :  and  through  these  I  am  more  a  kin  to  the  great  Ameri- 
ean  family  than  he  ever  can  be.  Without  perjory  or  apostacy  from 
his  office,  he  can  neter  have  a  wife,  nor  family.  He  is  a  stranger  to 
fkMe  IMV  and  holy  relations.  He  has  no  conntry— no  home.  He 
lives  and  he  must  die  under  the  command  of  foreign  superiors;  and 
they  may,  by  authority  or  promolion,  remove  him  to  Europe  or  Asia  at 
pleasure.  For  these  and  other  reasons  I  am  identified  with  Protestant 
a,  and  claim  a  relation  here  to  which  his  heart  shall  ever  be  a 
r*— [Time  expired.] 


Bmam  PumcBLi.  riiei— 

AMtlMr  iiBtance  of  the  unfairness  with  which  Catholic  prineiplet 
«PB  ii|WiMated :  another  occasion  for  a  holy  triumph ! 

lliit  Ehemish  Testament,  from  which  the  gentleman  has  just  now 
iwdf  was  never  sanctioned  by  the  Catholic  church.  It  was  published 
by  a  caucus  of  parsons  in  New  York,  (whose  names  are  pr«»fixcd  to  it,) 
for  the  flZfiiM  purpose  of  vitifyinff  the  faith,  and  outraging  the  feel- 
ings of  Catholics !  And  this  is  caflcd  a  Catholic  bible !  Good  God  I 
whither  has  justice  ied  !  Archbishop  Murray,  of  Dublin,  has  lately, 
in  the  most  solemn  manner,  condemned  these  notes.  They  are  not  to 
be  found  in  the  Catholic  bible,  used  in  this  or  in  any  other  country.  I 
am  laboring  to  inspire  my  opponent  with  sentiments  of  self-respect; 
and  assure  him  anew,  that  "  evil  eommunieation  eorrupfs  good  man' 
fwrt.**  The  occasion  oilled  for  original  documents,  candid  statements, 
ami  reputable  authorities ;  but,  instead  of  these,  the  public  are  mocked 
by  my  friend  with  spurious,  garbled  extracts,  which  a  dignified  con- 
troversialist would  have  treated  with  contempt.  We  repudiate  the 
notes,  which  Protestants  have  appended, /or  im,  to  this  bible. 

Mb.  Camfbili«— Produce  another. 

Bishop  Pubcbuu— I  will.  Behold  It.  Here  is  the  bible  to  be 
found  in  every  book-store,  where  Catholic  works  are  for  sale.  Here 
is  Luke,  chap.  ix.  65 !  Not  a  word  of  it  there!  (Holds  it  opened, 
towards  the  audience,  and  towards  Mb.  Campbbuu) 


hlblt,  was  published  In  the  very  year  and  the  very  place  with  the  edi- 
tion, from  which  Mr.  Smith  pretends  to  have  quoted.  You  have 
heard  Mr.  Kinmont 

The  gentleman  has  cited  the  words  of  Christ,  ••  Do  this  in  commem 
onilon  of  me,*'  against  the  real  presence.    This  is  all  I  wanted,  to 
complete  my  argument.    Here  Is  the  answer : 

**  AUcr  having  proposed  the  tentiiiientsof  the  church  upon  tbete  words,"  thtsig 
iitf  ft«lf  »*'  we  M»«it  t<^"  what  the  thinlw  of  these  others,  whirh  Chri«t  added : "  ila 
Um  in  memory  of  me.**    It  it  dmr  that  the  intention  of  the  Son  of  God  ii  to 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC   RKLIOION. 

OS  hf  theie  words  to  raneniber  the  death  which  he  soflTered  for  our  laket: 
Si.  Paul  concludes,  froni  these  aanie  words,  that  we  annouooe,  in  this  myst*- 
ly,  the  death  of  the  Lord.  But  it  must  not  be  inia^ned  that  this  remeiubranca 
of  his  death,  excludes  the  real  pretence  of  his  bodr;  on  the  contrary,  by  only 
considering  what  has  been  just  now  explained,  it  will  fully  appear  that  this  cora* 
menaoration  it  founded  upon  the  real  presence.  For  as  the  Jews,  in  eating  their 
peace  offerings,  remembered  that  the^  had  been  sacrificed  for  them,  so  we,  in 
eatinr  the  flesh  of  Jesus  Christt  our  victim,  should  remember  that  he  had  beea 
immolated  for  us.  It  is  therefore  this  same  flesh  eaten  by  the  faithful,  which  not 
only  awakes  in  us  the  memory  of  his  immolation,  but  which  confirms  to  us  the 
truth  of  it.  And  far  from  being  able  to  say  that  this  solemn  commemoration 
which  Jesus  Christ  orders  us  to  make,  excludes  the  presence  of  the  flesh,  it  if 
visible,  on  the  contrarv,  that  this  tender  recollection,  which  he  wills  we  should 
have  of  him,  in  the  holy  communion,  as  immolated  for  us,  is  founded  upon  the 
real  receiving  of  this  same  flesh;  it  being  surely  impossible  to  forget,  that  it  is  for 
us  he  hath  given  his  body  in  sacrifice,  when  we  see  that  he  gives  us  still  every 
day  this  victim  for  our  food.'* 

I  now  come  to  the  subject  of  purgatory,  which  my  friend  calls  the 
lever  of  the  pope,  to  raise  the  world.  1  should  be  glad  to  see  the 
pope  raise  the  world  in  any  way.  If  he  has  not  the  power  to  raise 
mortals  to  the  skies,  he,  at  least,  wants  the  will  to  pull  men  or  angels 
down.  The  doctrine  of  purgatory  can  be  proved  by  a  few  plain  texts. 
The  first  is  from  2d  Machali^es,  lii.  42;  where  we  read,  that  the  val- 
iant Machabeus  sent  twelve  thousand  drachmas  of  silver  to  Jerusalem, 
for  sacrifice,  to  be  offered  for  the  souls  of  the  dead.  **  //  is,  therefore^ 
sajfs  ike  scripture,  a  holy  and  a  wholesome  thought  to  pray  for  the  deadf 
thai  they  may  be  loosed  from  their  *tn«." 

My  mend  will  say,  the  book  of  Machabees  is  not  canonical.  But, 
is  it  not,  as  Du  Pin  would  say,  very  ill  done  of  him,  to  reject  a  booic 
of  scripture,  because  it  pinches  him.  This  is  a  fine  way  of  confuting 
Catholics:  to  mutilate  the  scripture  when  it  favors  our  doctrine;  to 
believe  our  enemies,  when  they  misrepresent  it;  and  to  attribute  to« 
and  force  upon  us,  doctrines  which  we  do  not  profess. 

The  books  of  the  Machabees  are  to  be  found  in  the  Codex  Alexan- 
drinus,  and  in  all  the  approved  bibles  of  the  Catholic  church,  from  the 
bennning.  Why  tear  them,  at  this  late  day,  from  the  canon?  Be- 
sides, they  are,  at  least,  authentic  history,  and,  as  such,  faithful  rec- 
ords of  the  belief  of  the  only  people  who,  at  the  time  when  they  were 
written,  professed  the  true  faith. 

Jesus  Christ  says,  that  there  is  a  blasphemy  against  the  Spirit; 
which  is  a  sin  that  will  not  be  forgiven,  neither  in  this  world,  nor  in 
that  which  is  to  come.  (Matt.  xii.  32.)  These  words  clearly  imply 
that  some  sins  wiU  he  forgiven  in  the  world  to  come.  Where  1  Not 
in  heaven,  which  **  nothing  defiled  can  enter;*'  not  in  hell,  for  out  of 
hell  there  is  no  redemption.  What  is  that  plarc,  called  Abraham's 
hosom^  on  which  Lazarus  reposed,  until  heaven  was  opened  to  the 
souls  of  men,  by  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ  I  Was  it  heaven,  or  hell, 
or  that  Intermediate  place  or  state,  which  Catholics  call  by  the  name 
of  purffstory  I  It  is  necessarily  the  latter :  apart  from  the  suflfering  of 
sense  oy  purifying  fire,  it  would  be  a  state  of  mental  or  spiritual  su^ 
fering :  as  it  was  one  of  separation  from  God,  whose  beauty  the  soul, 
released  from  the  prison  of  the  body,  and  the  darkness  of  sin  and  ig>* 
norance,  so  clearly  discerns,  and  so  ardently  desires  to  enjoy.  The 
Savior  tells  us  to  be  reconciled  quickly  with  our  adversary,  while  we 
are  in  the  way :  lest  we  be  delivered  over  to  the  judge,  and  cast  into 
pnsoo,  whence  we  shall  not  be  released,  until  we  shall  have  paid  the 


iwi 


m 


JWllAi  M  M    WZ1     A  U'M 

lait  fartliiii|.  (Ifatt.  ▼.  36.)  Wbai  pfiwiii  is  this!  What  place  of 
torrowfiii  iitoiiliiMi  on  the  way  to  ktaweniif  glory  f  Neilher  heaTen. 
tor  the  abode  of  oTerlastiiig  torments:  conseqaentlYtpiiri^tory. 

•*  CkrM  died  for  our  aim,"  says  St  Peter,  (1st  fipist.  ui.  18,)  "  ft©- 
mgjmi  lo  demh  in  ihejletk^  hui  mMwmed  in  tke  ipmt  r  m  wAteA  dbt 
mumng,  ke  preached  io  ikom  fnrtli  lAol  were  in  primmJ*  This  is  the 
■iaee,  of  which  it  is  said,  io  the  apostles*  ereed,  ^^  He  de$eended  inU 
Idf  f**  which  was  surely  not  the  bell  of  the  damned,  but  that  tempo- 
fary  hell,  or  hades,  or  purffatoiy,  to  whose  Inmates  he  announced  the 
joyful  tidinga  of  their  deGferanee,  where  the  first  and  the  second 
Adam  met,  the  type  and  reality.  What  is  the  meaning  of  the  uniTer- 
■ally  prevalent  practice,  of  whieh  St.  Paul  speaks,  of  prforminff 
pious  works,  called  baptisms  for  the  dead :  ^*  El$e  what  maU  they  & 
tdb  are  bt^zedfor  the  dead,  if  Ike  dead  rim  noi  ai  oiL  Why  art  Ihey 
Am  hifHmd'for  ikem  T^    (Ist  Cor.  jlt.  39.) 

**  Ueiice,  th«  council  of  Trent  teaches:  **Tbit  there  ii  a  porgatory,  end  that 
the  souls  detained  there,  are  helped  by  the  prayers  of  the  nLithful,  aod  particn- 
My  by  the  aiC:ceptable  sacrifice  of  the  altar.'* 

ii  Cjtil  of  Jerasaleni,  Eu«ellias,  St  Epiphaniust  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Jerome.  St. 
Aepistine,  and  several  other  ancient  fotners  and  writers,  demonstrate,  that  tbe 
dbelrliM  of  the  church  was  always,  and  u  now  the  same,  as  that  which  was  de- 
ined  by  the  conncil  of  Trent,  with  respect  both  to  prayers  for  the  dead,  and  aa 
intermediale  slate,  which  we  call  purgatory.  How  express  is  the  authority  of 
the  l&tt  named  father,  where  he  says:  **  through  the  prayers  and  sacrifices  ottbn 
«b«Rh  and  alms-deeds,  God  deals  more  mercifully  with  the  departed  than  their 
■iaa  deserve.**     Serm.  172.  Enchirid.  cap.  109,  110. 

SI.  Chrysostom,  who  flourished  within  three  hundred  years  of  the  age  of  the 
■pmlles,  and  must  be  admitted  as  an  unexceptionable  witness  of  their  doctrine 
and  practice,  writes  as  follows:  **It  was  not  without  rood  reason  ord«in»dhy 
tke  t^ottlett  that  mention  should  be  made  of  the  dead  in  the  tremendous  mys- 
teries, because  they  knew  well  that  these  would  receive  great  benefit  from  it** 
la  Cap.  1.  Philip.  Hom.  3.  Tertnllian,  who  lived  in  the  age  next  to  that  of  the 
apostles,  speaking  of  a  pious  widow,  says:  **  She  prays  for  the  soul  of  herhoa- 
band,  and  begs  refreshment  for  him.'*  L.  De  Monogam.  c.  10.  St.  Cyprian, 
who  lived  in  the  following  age.  says:  ♦•  It  is  one  thin|r  to  be  waiting  for  pardon i 
anuliier  to  attain  to  glory:  one  thing  to  be  sent  to  prison,  not  to  go  from  thence 
till  the  last  farthing  is  paid;  another  to  receive  immediately  the  reward  of  faith 
and  f  irtue:  one  thing  to  suffer  lengthened  torments  for  sin,  and  to  be  chastised 
and  purified  for  a  long  time  in  that  fire;  another  to  have  cleansed  away  all  sin 
by  suffering.*'    S.  Cypr.  L.  4.  Ep.  f. 

The  doctrine  of  the  oriental  churches  agrees  with  that  of  the  Catholic  church, 
in  the  only  two  points  defined  by  her,  namely,  as  to  there  being  a  middle  state, 
which  we  call  pnr^toiy,  and  as  to  th«  souls,  detained  in  it,  being  helped  by  the 
reis  of  the  livinr  fiulhfnl.    True  it  is,  they  do  not  generally  believe,  that 
m  souls  are  punished  by  a  material  fire;  but  neither  does  the  Catholic  chnrcb 

_  lire  a  beliei  of  this  opinion.  On  some  occasions,  Luther  admits  of  purgMtory* 
tin  article  founded  on  scripture.  Melancthon  confesses  that  the  ancients  pray* 
•d  for  the  dead,  and  says  that  the  Lutherans  do  not  find  fault  with  it.  Cfalvin 
iaiinates,  that  the  souls  of  all  the  jnstaro  detained  in  Abraham's  bosom  until  thu 
day  of  judgment.  In  the  first  liturgy  of  the  chnrch  of  England,  there  is  an  es 
press  prayer  for  the  departed,  that  **God  would  grant  them  mercy  and  everlasl- 
Ik  pace."    Colliers  Eccl.  Hist.  Vol.  II. p.  257. 

Bishops  Andrews,  Usher,  Montague,  Taylor,  Forbes,  Sheldon,  Barrow  of  S* 
Asaph's,  and  Blandford,  all  believed  that  the  dead  ought  to  be  prayed  for.    To 
these,  I  may  add,  the  religioos  Dr.  Johnson,  whose  published  Mediutlons  prove, 
that  be  constantly  prayea  for  his  dccened  wife.'* 

The  Universalists  make  hell  a  purgatory. 

The  notion,  that  this  doctrine  fills  the  pone's  eoiers  with  gold,  it 
loo  ridiculous  to  be  refuted !  Erery  Catholic  knows  ita  absurdity. 
^a  tcf  the  intenlaon  of  the  priest,  about  which  the  gentleman  has  found 


waiP'iamPP*'''   ^r^m^ 


■OMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION 


337 


•o  imidi  to  say,  that  la  no  diffienlty.  How  do  we  judge  of  the  Inten- 
tion f  Simply,  by  the  act,  the  surest  evidence  of  its  existence.  Can 
we  ask  if  a  man  has  any  intention  to  eat  his  dinner,  when  we  see  him, 
sit  down  to  table,  take  his  knife  and  fork,  use  them,  and  eat  till  he  is 
filled  (  so  when  we  see  the  priest  does  what  every  priest  does,  and 
the  faithful  people  know  that  he  ought  to  do,  we  nave  the  best  evi- 
dence of  his  intention.  Besides,  what  motive  could  he  have  for  such 
a  gratiiiUHis  violation  of  the  law  of  God  and  profanation  of  a  sacra^ 
menL  iV'cnie  repenU  pemmta  is  an  old  and  a  true  maxim.  He  would 
fall  into  other  excesses,  first,  and  be  suspended — God  will  not  aban- 
don his  church ;  and  the  sincere  christian  will  always  be  rewarded  by 
him,  according  to  his  deserts.  No  man  goes  suddenly,  &c.  see  Secreta 
Monita.  It  was  placed  invidiously  among  the  rubbish  by  the  enemies 
of  the  Jesuits,  if  found  amid  the  ruins  of  their  house,  as  the  whole 
society  repudiated  it. 

Every  learned  and  sound  critic,  who  is  at  all  honorable,  deaounces 
the  imposition — it  is  an  old  trick. 

Ovid  in  his  I3th  book,  verse  59,  60,  suggests  the  idea,  in  speak- 
ing of  Ulysses*  treachery,  when  he  first  had  ^old  hid  in  the  tent  of 
Palamedes  and  then  denounced  him  for  having  been  bribed  by  the 
enemies  of  Greece. 

**  Firtumqne  probavit 
**  Crinirn,  tt  ostenditqo  kI  jam  pr.pfoderat  aiinini.** 

Shall  I  invent  calumnies,  when  run  out  of  proof  of  any  man*8  dishon- 
esty 1  God  forbid !  What  virtuous  and  immaculate  family  may  not  be 
thus  assailed  1  And  the  more  virtuous  and  honorable  they  are,  the 
more  will  they  be  disconcerted  and  overwhelmed,  for  the  moment; 
but  the  more  complete  will  be  their  own  vindication  and  their  slander- 
ers* disgrace  in  the  end. 

The  gentleman  cannot  get  over  what  he  said  of  Washin^on  and 
our  KevoluLionary  heroes,  *'•  the  fatal  shaft  is  sticking  in  his  side.** 

God  has  given  to  the  people,  neither  too  much,  nor  too  little  power* 
He  has  given  them  no  spiritual  authority ;  for  as  Jesus  Christ  said  to 
his  apostles,  so  may  the  priest  say  to  his  flock :  ^*  You  have  not  cho- 
sen  me.**  **  No  one  durst  assume  the  ofllice  of  priest,  but  he  that  is  call- 
ed to  it,  ag  Aaron  was*^ — and  he  was  not  called  by  the  people,  la 
the  Catholic  church  we  solemnly  appeal  to  the  people  for  Ceatimony 
for,  or  against,  a  candidate  for  holy  orders.  God  has  ^ven  the  peo- 
ple reoMwiable  power,  in  temporal  matters,  and  revolutions  have  too 
ofien  shown  their  evils  and  calamities,  in  the  most  horrid  and  brutal 
excesses  and  the  loss  of  innumerable  lives.  This  is  an  awful  penalty 
for  the  rash  exercise  of  temporal  power  on  the  part  of  the  people.  Onr 
own  revolution  was,  perhaps,  the  calmest,  tht>  most  temperate,  the 
Ie4wt  abused  for  evil  purposes  by  wicked  man,  because  we  had 
Washington  and  kindred  spirits  to  direct  the  storm.  These,  my  wor- 
thy friend  calls  perjurers  !  As  God  has  restricted  the  people,  he  has 
also  restricted  their  rulers,  in  their  exercise  of  power.  How  many 
terrible  lessons  have  not  kings  been  taught,  for  its  abuse.  Why  can- 
not nations  unite  to  select  a  common  umpire ;  to  whom  all  disputes 
should  be  referred,  and  thus  the  crimes  of  kings,  and  revolution, 
with  all  its  accompanying  horrors,  by  the  people,  extinguished  in  the 
bud. 

I  do  not  undertake  to  defend  the  popes  in  their  use  of  the  deposing 
power — and  were  my  voice,  at  this  moment,  ringing  in  the  Vatican, 
2I>  22 


DEHATt   OK   THE 

.iittmil  of  tlie  Baptist  tliiiKeh,  STcamofe  street,  Cincinnati,  I  should 
not  bo  nffovoii.  Tliero  tre  in  tiie  niligioiiSv  at  well  as  in  the  ftpiri 
tutl  iPorM,  two  fofoos,  the  eentrlpetal,  and  tlie  centrifugal.  'I'h<^  see 
of  Rome  is  as  the  nun  and  centre  of  the  sjstem,  to  which  all  the  pla* 
nets,  revolving  in  beauteous  harmony,  tend.  We  bless,  we  love,  we  set* k 
with  ardor,  by  a  kind  of  religious  instinct,  strong  as  the  law  s  of  gravita- 
taoB,  this  Gomnion  centre,  which  gives  us  all,  our  proper  impetus  and 
eoheiwicy.  But  like  the  planets,  we  are  not  absorbed  hy  it.  Wc 
know  its  excellence,  its  usefulness,  its  destination,  its  limits. 
Mow,  to  show  you  what  our  sentiments  are,  with  regard  to  Uie  tan- 

Krai  powef  of  the  pope,  here  is  a  standard  work,  the  identical  texl- 
ok  of  theolopf  which  I  studied  in  Paris  many  years  ago.  The  au- 
thor is  still  living,  and  instead  of  being  rebuked  for  what  I  am  going 
to  say,  he  has,  on  the  contrary,  been  made  bishop  of  Maus,  in  France. 
His  name  is  Bouvier,  and  he  is  as  pious  a  christian  as  he  is  a  sound 
divine.  1  read  you  evidence  from  scripture,  tradition  and  reason,  in 
favor  of  the  doctrine  which  is  the  burden  of  the  proposition,  viz.  that 
**  the  pope  has  no  right,  direct,  or  indirect,  by  any  divine  commission, 
to  the  temporalities  of  kings  or  other  Christians."  When  was  the 
lofiofllnf  power  first  claimed  hy  the  pope!  Ecclesiastical  history 
answers,  in  the  10th  century.  Then  by  the  rule  which  I  have  alrea- 
dy laid  down,  it  is  no  part  of  Catholic  doctrine.  It  came  a  thousand 
years  too  late. 

**  FropoMtioD.  That  th«  Roman  Ponliir  doi>t  not  poneai,  by  divine  rtf  ht.  any 
ipwer,  either  direct  or  indirttct.  over  the  temporal itiet  of  ktn|p*,or  other  chrt«- 
liaili."  Tbi»  proposition  It  proved  1st,  from  the  sacred  scripture:  •'^t  Itm  #k- 
fl«r  tcnl  Mc.  Imtm  §€mt  you,  (John  xa.  21.)  The  Soti  of  mmm  hath  nof  wAert 
imimkh  ktmd,  (Mat  viii.  SO.)     Who  kmih  made  me  ajudge,  or  «  dMiet  09tt 

Cmf'  (Luke  xii.  14.)  Hence  we  may  reason  thus.  The  M>ver««i^  Fontiff'ran 
re  noauthoritv  over  the  tempural  goods  of  wen  by  divine  right,  unless  it  be 
Kranted  to  him  by  Christ,  but  be  has  received  no  such  power  from  Chrt«t.  for 
Chritt  gave  to  no  man  a  power,  which,  he  himscif,  when  on  e9rth,  did  not  pos- 
§■•■;  but  Christ  when  oa  earth  possessed  no  such  power,  n-latingto  temporal  niat- 
lifa,  as  appears  both  from  his  poverty,  and  from  these  words  of  his,  **  who  hmth 
■i  mJMd^e  or  m  Mvidtr  over  you."  Therefore  the  Roman  Pontif  does  not 


IS,  by  divine  authoritv,  any  power,  Stc. 

Besides,  Christ  cxpmnlr  declared  that  be  was  a  hinr ,  but  at  the  same  tini^.  he 
positively  denied  that  his  kincdom  was  of  this  world,  (John  xviii.  36.)  fhr  this 
pmpof  t  /  ami  mio  Hu  world,  h€  mys,  that  I  mit^  bear  testimony  to  the  truth: 
M  another  place  be  ordered  to  ^ve  to  Caamr  the  thingt  that  belong  to  Ceesar, 
fllii.  sali  SI.)  By  a  miracle,  he  caused  the  stater  to  be  found  in  U.e  uiouthof  a 
ish,|]Mtthc  tribute  might  be  paid  for  himself  and  Peter,  (Matt.  xvii.  27;)  and 
surely  be  couM  not  shew,  in  mora  eapfcsa  temi*.  that  he  did  not  wish  to  eier> 
cise  any  temporal  authority.  Farthcnnofc,  when  he  sent  hts  apostles,  he  by  no 
■nans,  spoke  to  them,  concerninf  temporal  aflairs,  or  any  political  authority, 
bat  only  of  ih4  Jrcyt  o^  th*  kk^dtm  |f  keemm,  and  the  nower  of  binding  and 
mmimg;  he  oiderao  tiat,  goinf  tbroi^  the  entire  world,  they  wouM  teaek 
iksm  ikSngg  wkkk  Af  eonunatulf^  thtmf  k§  mmnounced  to  Iktm  meiiy  tribula 
9imM  ^  twery  toW,  and  even  death;  he  commanded  thtm,  ioadmtt  and  repron 
liof •.  who  tranupr§m*  bni  ikmi  ikiy  MkmM  moimmiik  I4fm.  mtkMi  by  jgrari/tml 
fmimM:  ^  k*  wm  mM  kimr  tk§  ektmk^  my§  At,  iff  Aim  As  to  lAe«,  a#  lAe  heathen 
emd  tk§  pmbiiean,  (MatL  sviii.  17.):  he  that  beHeveth  not,  $hall  be  condemned, 
(Mark  avi.  16.)  *i%t  apottles,  in  like  manner,  far  from  exert!i<iin«r  any  tempo- 
ral pwer,  oa  the  contrary,  stronf  ly  recommended  obedience  and  respect  to  all 

gan  princes  and  perBecuton,  and  rulers  sent  by  them. 

It  can  be  proved, 2od.  from  tradition.    We  would  be  tedious,  were  we  to  ro. 

■rso  all  the  testimonies  of  Fathers,  Doctors  and  chief  bishops,  who  by  their 
word  and  etample  clearly  taught,  that  the  civil  power  was  entirtrly  indepen* 
■mtii  nf  the:  eeeMastical. 

TSfftaliaa  in  bit  Apologetic,  chap.  30,  say»:  ••They,  (ibc  christians)  know 


SOMAN   CATIiOUC    RKUtaON. 


339 


who  hath  given  power  to  fmperori........they  know  that  it  was  God,  alone,  in 

whose  jfower  they  are,  to  whom,  they  are  second,  and  after  whom  thej  are  first 
.......an  emperor  has  his  authority,  from  him  by  whom  he  was  created  man. 

ncfore  being  emperor.     He  receives  power  from  him,  from  whom  also  he  receiv- 
ed the  brcHth  oflifc fVe  prayjor  all  emperors.**    All  christians,  imbued  with 

this  doctiine,  op|M)8ed  the  anus  of  patience  alone,  to  the  most  unjust  and 
mo«t  cruf  I  tortures,  for  more  than  three  hundred  years. 

Osius,  bishop  of  Cordova,  wiites  thus  to  the  emperor  Conetantins,  who  favor- 
ed the  Arians.  **  Do  you  not  interfere  with  ecclesiastical  matters,"  as  already 
quoted. 

Pope  Ge.asius,  in  his  epistle  8th  to  Anastasius,  a  violent  enemy  of  Catholics, 
fays,  *  There  are  two  things,  O  emperor  Augustus,  by  which  principally,  this 
world  it  governed,  the  sacred  authority  of  the  popes,  and  the  authority  of  kings. 
(La'^be  torn.  4.  p^e  1122.)  This  pope,  therefore,  ci|Dsidered  that  each  powef 
was  indenendeut  o(  the  other. 

It  can  be  proved,  3d.  By  theological  reasoning.  1.  That  opinion  ought  to  be 
rejected,  which  was  entirely  unheard  of  during  the  ten  first  a^es;  but  that  opin- 
ion which  holds  that  the  chief  bishop  has  any  just  right  even  indirect,  over  the 
temporal  possessions  of  princes,  or  other  christians,  was,  by  no  mean?,  heard  oi 
during  the  ten  first  ages,  to  wit.  down  to  the  time  of  Gregory  VII.  who  in  the  year 
lOUU,  attempted  to  depose  Henry  IV.  and  disturbed  the  peace  of  the  entire  world, 
by  the  assertion  of  this  novel  right.  Therefore  that  opinion  should  be  rejected,  &c. 
*2.  That  opinion  should  be  entirely  rejected  which  would  occasion  most 
grievous  evils,  but  the  opinion  which  we  oppose,  gives,  &c.  1.  It  renders  harmo- 
ny between  the  priesthood,  and  the  sovereign  power,  impossible.  2.  It  would 
prevent  infidel  princes  from  embracing  the  christian  religion,  and  heretics  firom 
returning  to  the  true  church.  3.  It  would  aA'ord  a  necessary  occasion  for  con- 
tinual wars,  if  it  were  practised,  which,  experience  has  already  too  clearly  shewn. 
Therefore,  it  should  be  entirely  rejected,  &c.  &c.  &c. 

Now  see  here  the  scholastic  method  of  proving  propositions,  and 
an  admirable  one  it  is.  We  say  1st,  scripture  teaches  it, — 2nd,  anti- 
quity corroborates  ity— 3d,  reason  confirms  it.  That  is  the  method 
we  follow,  in  all  our  schools.  This  is  the  solid,  and  irrefutable  man- 
ner in  which  this  proposition  is  laid  down  and  established.  Does  this 
look  like  submitting  to  the  dictation  of  the  nope  in  temporal  matters  ! 
Did  the  En§rlish  Catholics  obey  the  pretenoed  absolution  bull  ?  Did 
not  Catholics  under  arms;  and  with  arms,  as  in  the  case  of  Julius  II. 
leaist  their  acknowledged,  and  in  his  proper  sphere,  respected  Pon 
tiff  f    Did  they  not  tie  his  hands  while  they  kissed  his  feet ! 

Waddington  tells  us  that  when  Louis  XII.  of  France  quarreled 
with  the  pope,  he  called  a  council  of  bishops  at  Tours,  and  proposed 
the  question,  whether  he  could  detain  the  pope,  as  his  prisoner,  on  av 
ocftaaion,  which  he  described.  They  gave  an  affirmative  answer 
Fhis,  in  addition  to  what  I  have  said,  shows  how  the  distinction  of 
power,  and  of  rights,  was  understood  at  that  period,  and  every  epoch, 
back  to  the  apostolic  ages. 

My  friend  asks  for  a  disdairoer  of  these  pretensions,  on  the  part 
of  the  pope. 

Mr.  Campbell. — Not  by  the  pope,  but  by  the  councils. 

Bishop  Purcbll. — ^The  general  councils  never  made  the  recogni 
tion  of  this  power,  an  article  of  faith ;  why,  then,  should  they  dis- 
slaim  it! 

Here  is  what  pope  Innocent  III.  said.  His  account  of  this  affair 
Is  very  curious.  It  is,  indeed,  a  strong  disclaimer,  and  every  word 
deserves  to  be  matuiely  weighed. 

Cum  rex  superiorem  in  temporalibus  minime  recognoscat,  sine  juris  alteriut 
Ispsione  in  eo  se  jurisdictioui  nostrae  subjicere  jiotuit,  in  quo  vic'er.  tur  aliquibus, 

auod  perseipsum,  non  tanquam  pater  cum  filiis,  sed  tanquam  prince™  rum  sub- 
itis  potuit  (liapeuMire.    Hegi  igitur  gratiam  feciiuus  requisiti: — quod  uon  solum 


:i40 


BIBATB   Oil   TM» 


EOMAN   CATHOLIC    SELIGION. 


341 


III 


in  Etximtn  ptininoiiici,  Mper  quo  plentn  in  temporalibai  fcriiniia  potestntein, 
tcntni  etiam  in  ftliis  regioiimiis,  certtt  c«ufliiintff«ctn«ten|}onilcaij«iri#dtctioneiii 
dOilM^er  etercenins.  Noo  qnoclatieno  Jurt  prxjudir^re  veltniiii,  tcI  potestatein 
mollii  iwldMlMii  utarpare,  cam  non  ignoraniui  Chriatuiu  in  eTiin]^elio  rt- tuondiMe; 
mdite,  i|iiaiiant€««ari!<.  Ciesari,  et  qussuot  Dei,  Deo.  Propter  quoci  postula« 
tut  utMiMiftelnn  dtvidtret  iattr  duos  :  quii,  inqutt,  coustituit  iiiejudicciti  intef 
rmj  Sed  quia  in  Deuterouoniio  coutioeter,  si  difficile  et  aiiibiKuuiii  apud  t« 
Miiicitiiii  «■■«  penpexeris,  Suree  et  aicende  nd  Iocuid,  quem  dipt  Doniinus 
Heiistiiiiftfte.    Liber  V.  £pistl2.  Innocent  III. 

Since  tlie  King  bjr  no  means  recorniies  a  superior  in  temporal  aothoritj,  ha 
cwiM  Mlmiit  to  our  jurisdiction  without  infrii%ing  upon  the  right  of  another, 
b  wMd  it  iMiiis  to  some,  that  be  coald  dispense,  not  as  a  father  with  his  children 
Uutasn prince  with  his  subjects;  therefore  we  granted  the  King  what  was  re* 
i|ilisfl%  D«ewae  we  not  onljr  exercise  a  temporal  power,  in  errtaincuget,  in  the 
iMtriiMMjr  of  the  church,  over  which  w«  act  with  full  authoritjr  in  temporalities, 
but  also  in  other  districts,  certain  matters  bcinf  considered  un  :  Not  that  wn 
with  to  determine  prematurely  of  another's  right,  or  usurp  a  power  not  due  to 
■s  :  since  we  arc  not  iarnoraut  of  what  Christ  has  said  in  the  gonpel.  On  account 
©f  whkh  he  was  aakea  to  ditide  an  inheriiHoie  between  two,  who,  savs  be,  has 


ippointed  me  Judge  between  r« ?    But  that  it  is  written  in  Deuterotoiuy,  if 

Ci  ind  a  diflicult  and  doabttnl  case,  rise  and  repair  to  the  phsce,  which  the 
111  your  God  has  chosen,  &c.  B.  V.  E.  12,  Innocent  III. 
Here  the  pope,  himseir,  quotes  scripture  and  precedent,  against 
tlie  aMunplioa  of  such  power.  Nex|p— behold  the  testimony  of  a 
ptitimlar  council,  the  doctrine  of  the  ancient  Fathers,  of  an  eminent 
iiviae,  tlm  celebrated  Arthur  O'ljeaiy,  on  the  matter  before  us,  and 
oiperaeeutton  for  conscience  sake. 

^The  Council  of  Toledo  forbids  the  use  of  violence  to  enforce  belief:  **Bccanse,** 
add  the  fathers,  **  God  shows  merry  to  whom  he  thinks  fit  ;  and  hardens  whom 

ha  pleases."  ^  Pneciptt  sancia  synodns  nemini  deinceiM  ad  rredendum  rim  in- 
liire.  Cui  enini  Dens  vult,  niiseretur  ;  et  quem  vult,  indurat."*  AikI  the 
CMMcil  of  Lateran.  under  Pope  Alexander  the  third,  acknowledges,  that  tha 
chwvh  rvjects  bloody  executions  on  the  score  of  religion,  which  proves  to  dem« 
onstration.  that  the  canon  charged  tu  the  fourth  council  of  Lateran,  under  Inno- 
cent the  third,  in  which  canon,  **  the  secular  powers  are  addrtssed  to  take  an 
iMKlo  ailMinlnate  all  heretics  oat  of  their  territories,  and  in  case  of  refusal,  to 
lata  tbtk-  luli^acts  abwilvad  from  their  allegiance,  and  the  bnds  of  the  heretics 
to  be  aeiied  by  the  Catbolica,**  *c. is  snurioas.  Collyer.  the  Protestant  his- 
torian, in  his  fifth  volume  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  acknowledges  that  it  is  not 
Ibnnd  in  any  copy,  coeval  with  the  council.  Some  hundred  rears  after  the 
council,  it  was  produced  to  light  by  a  German.  And  we  know  full  well,  that  at 
that  time,  savcral  spurious  pieces  were  produced,  to  serve  the  purposes  of 


Wen  even  such  a  decree,  or  any  other  of  a  similar  nature,  genuine,  the  Cath- 
olics would  reject  them,  without  any  bvaach  of  faith  ;  because  the  church  has 
BO  power  over  life,  limb,  the  rights  of  sovereigns,  the  property  of  individuals, 
or  any  temporal  concern  whatsoever.  Her  bishops,  then,  whether  separate  In 
or  in  a  collective  body,  cannot  graill  anv  such  power  into  their  spirttnal  coniniis- 
iioB.  Thev  would  act  in  an  extrajudicial  manner,  and  beyond  the  limits  of  tlieir 
■phare.  This  I  have  proved  in  my  remarks  on  Mr.  Wesley's  letter,  and  elsewhrra. 

Far  from  rounteiiancing  cruelty,  death  and  oppression,  **  tha  spirit  of  tha 
chorrh  was,  in  snch  a  ntanner.  the  spirit  of  meekness  and  charitv,  that  she  pre- 
Taalcd,  as  much  as  in  her  power,  the  death,  of  criminals,  and  even  of  her  most 
cruel  aneniies."  says  Fleary.  "  You  have  seen  how  the  lives  of  the  murderers 
of  the  martyrs  ot  Armenia  were  saved  ;  and  St.  Austin's  effort  to  preserve  the 
Ooiiatials,  (who  had  exercised  such  cruelties  against  t be  Catholics)  from  the 
tkor  of  the  imperial  laws.  You  have  seen  how  much  the  church  detested  the 
{■discreet  seal  of  those  bishops,  who  prosecuted  the  heresiarch  Priscillian  to 
death. 

la  general,  the  church  saved  the  lives  of  all  criminals,  as  fiir  as  she  had  power. 
St.  Augustine  accounts  for  this  conduct,  in  his  letter  to  Macedoaius,  where  we 

*  Cufi  de  Jadww,  dist.  ii. 


r^  that  tha  church  wished  there  wcve  ao  paina  n  this  life,  but  of  the  faealhig 
kind,  to  destroy,  not  num.  but  aia,  aad  to  preserve  thesinoer  frmueieraai  tor 
■lents."*  If,  in  after  ages,  some  popes  and  bishops  deviated  from  this  plan  of 
meekness  and  moderation,  their  condoct  should  not  involve  a  conseqaence  inju* 
rious  to  the  principles  of  the  Catholic  church,  which  condemns  such  proceedings. 
The  religion  of  Catholics  and  Protestants  condemns  frauds,  fornications,  drunk- 
enness, revenge,  duelling,  perjury,  Ac.  Some  of  their  relaxed  and  impious 
writers  heve  even  attempted,  not  only  to  palliate,  but  even  to  apolngiie  lor  such 
disorders.  The  children  of  the  christian  religion  daily  practise  them, — is  tha 
christian  relipon  accountable  for  the  breach  of  her  own  laws? 

My  friend  made  some  dtsplatf,  on  the  persecutingr  canon  of  the  coon- 
cil  of  Lateran,  and  yet  Collyer,  a  Protestant  historian,  in  the  5th  to- 
lume  of  his  ecclesiastical  history,  pronounces  it  spurious !  He  ac- 
knowledges that  it  is  not  found  in  the  copy  of  the  decrees  coeval  with 
the  council ;  that  it  was  manufactured  by  the  Germans,  hundreds  of 
years  afterwards ;  and  that  there  were  several  spurious  documents 
manufactured  about  the  same  time.  Now  hear  a  distinguished  pre- 
late of  our  church,  Dr.  England,  in  his  speech  before  <«congress,  io 
which  he  leaves  nothing  important  unsaid  on  this  topic.  I  am  happy 
to  incorporate  his  eloquent  remarks  in  this  debate. 

**  A  political  difficulty  bas  been  sometimes  raised  here.  If  this  infallible  tribu- 
nal which  you  profess  yourselves  bound  to  obey,  should  command  you  to  over- 
tura  our  government,  and  tell  yon  that  it  is  the  will  of  God  to  have  it  new  model* 
ed,  will  you  be  bound  to  obey?  And  how  then  can  we  consider  those  men  to 
be  good  citizens,  who  profess  to  owe  obedience  to  a  foreign  authority,  to  an  au- 
thority not  recognized  in  our  constitution;  to  an  authoritv  which  has  excommu- 
nicated and  deposed  sovereigns,  and  which  has  absolved  subjects  and  citizens 
from  their  bond  of  allegiance. 

Our  answer  to  tliis  is  extremely  simple  and  very  plain,  it  is,  that  we  would  not 
be  bound  to  obey  it;  that  we  recognize  no  snch  authority.^  I  would  not  allow 
to  the  pope  or  to  any  bishop  of  our  church,  outside  this  Union,  the  smallest  in- 
terference with  the  humblest  vote  at  our  most  insignificant  balloting  box.  Ha 
has  no  right  to  such  interference.  You  must,  from  the  view  which  I  have  taken, 
see  the  plain  distinction  between  spiritual  authority,  and  a  right  to  interfere  in 
the  regulation  of  human  government  or  civil  concerns.  You  nave  in  your  con- 
stitution wisely  kept  them  distinct  and  separate.  It  will  be  wisdom  and  prodence 
and  safety  to  continue  the  separation.  Your  constitution  says  that  Congress  shall 
have  no  power  to  restrict  the  free  exercise  of  religion.  Suppose  jrour  digni 
fied  body  to-morrow  attempted  to  restrict  me  in  the  exercise  or  that  right;  though 
the  law,  as  it  would  be  called,  should  pass  your  two  houses  and  obtain  the  signa- 
ture of  the  president,  I  would  not  obey  it,  because  it  would  be  no  law.  it  would 
be  an  usurpation:  for  yon  cannot  make  a  law  in  violation  of  vour  constitution; 
yon  have  no  power  in  such  a  case.  So,  if  that  tribunal  which  is  established  by 
the  Creator  to  testily  to  me  what  he  has  revealed,  and  to  make  the  necessary 
r^^lations  of  discipline  for  the  government  of  the  church,  shall  presume  to  go 
beyond  that  boundarv  which  circumscribes  its  power,  its  acts  are  invalid,  my 
rights  are  not  to  be  destroyed  by  its  usurpation,  and  there  is  no  principle  of  my 
creed  which  prevents  my  using  my  natural  right  of  proper  resistance  to  any  tyraa- 
Bical  usurpation.  You  have  no  power  to  interfere  with  my  religious  rights,  tha 
tribunal  of  the  church  has  no  power  to  interfere  with  my  civil  rights.  It  is  m 
duty  which  every  good  man  ought  to  dii^chnrge  for  his  own.  and  for  the  pnbhe 
benefit,  to  resist  any  encroachment  upon  either.  We  do  not  believe  that  God 
gave  to  the  church  any  power  to  interiiere  with  our  civil  rights  or  oar  civil  conceros. 
Christ  our  Lord  refused  to  interfere  in  the  division  of  the  inheritance  between  two 
brothers,  one  of  whom  requested  that  interference.  The  civil  tribuiiaU  of  Judea 
were  vested  with  sufficient  authority  for  that  purpose,  and  he  did  not  transfer  it 
to  his  apostles.  It  must  hence  be  apparent  that  any  idea  of  the  Roman  Catholics  of 
those  republics  being  in  any  way  under  the  influence  of  any  foreign  ecclesiastical 
power,  or  indeed  of  any  church  authority  in  Uie  exercise  of  their  civil  r^ts,  it 
a  serious  mistake.    There  is  no  class  of  our  fellow  citixens  mora  firee  to  think^ 


Sod 


*  Flaury.  Discours,  3.  No  9. 


iWi<w 


'fiS'ii  A  'fw   ma    ivn v 

MMmUA  mK    Vn     1  MM 


mOHlH   CATHOLIC    EELIGION. 


843 


■ml  to  •d.  im  thcikiielf  ct  on  iM:  nl»j«et  of  oar  'riglits  tli«»  we  ftfe,  ond  I  beltcro 
tiMfe  k  noloilf  forlionof  tkfi  Anicnaui  hmlif  morejealoutof  ibrrigainflaenr^ 
or  mon  raodj  to  retbt  it.    W«  bare  brethren  of  oar  churrli  in  every  pirt  of  tb« 

Eloboi  oodor  9wmj  hrm  of  goironinicnt.  Thii  b  •  tubiect  upon  which  ench  of  ui 
frto  fo  act  ■•  Im  thbilis  |Mroper.  We  Inow  of  no  tribunal  in  our  church  which 
cwi  interfcr«  in  oarproctsectinff  as  citixen*.  Our  ecclesiastical  authority  existed 
lialbn  oor  constitntiont  ia  not  aAectod,  bj  it;  there  is  not  in  the  world  a  consti« 
tation  which  it  docn  not  precede,  with  which  it  could  not  co-exist;  it  has  teen 
iMtboa  periah,  djnasties  decaj,  empires  prostrate;  it  has  co-existed  with  allt  it 
lug  gumred  then  all.  it  is  not  dependent  upon  anj  one  of  them;  tliey  niajr  itill 
flh«M|c.  and  it  will  itill  continne. 

We  MOW  conie  to  examine  what  are  called  the  pertecatin|^  lawsof  onrchorch 
In  the  Tear  1213,  at  the  council  of  Lateran.  certain  heresies  were  condemned 
by  the  nrsi  canon;  and  anionfst  other  thinp  this  canon  recites  as  Catholic  faith 
in  oppoaHion  to  fie  errors  oitboBe  whom  it  condemned,  that  there  was  but  one 
C3odf  the  Creator  of  all  thin|i.of  apirits  as  well  as  bodies;  the  author  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  equally  as  of  the  New  Testament 
nnd  of  the  Chriilian  dispensation:  that  be  created  not  only  the  good  angels 
but  also  the  devil  and  the  bad  anfenif  originaiijr  coniinr  good  from  his  hand,  and 
becoming  wicked  by  their  own  nialicCt  iuc.  In  its  thircT canon  it  excomumnicatei 
those  heretics,  and  declares  them  to  be  separated  from  the  body  of  the  church 
Then  follows  a  direcliun,  that  the  heretics  so  condemned,  are  to  be  given  up  to 
the  secular  powers,  or  to  their  bailiJb,  to  be  duly  ptmished.    This  direction  con 
tinues  to  require  of  alt  bishops  and  others  having  authority,  to  make  due  search 
within  their  several  districts  for  tlioao  heretics,  and  if  they  will  not  be  Induced 
to  retract  their  errors,  desires  that  they  should  be  delivered  over  to  be  punished. 
TlMio  is  an  injnnctlon  then  to  all  temporal  lords  to  cleanse  their  dominions  by 
lifl'nailnf  those  heretics:  and  if  they  will  not.  within  a  year  from  having 
been  so  admonished  by  the  church,  cleanse  their  lands  of  this  kentieal  filth 
thej  shall  be  deprived  if  they  have  superior  lords,  and  if  they  be  superior  lords 
niwl  be  negligent,  it  shaM  be  the  duty  of  the  metropolitan  and  his  provincial 
bishops  to  excommunicate  them,  and  if  any  one  of  those  lords  paramount  so  ex* 
commonicated  for  this  negligence  shall  continue  during  twelve  monthf  nnder  the 
escomninnication,  the  metropolitan  diall  certify  the  same  to  the  pope,  who,  find- 
ing admonition  useless,  shall  depose  this  prince,  and  absolve  his  lubiects  from 
iliiilr  ontbo  of  lealty.  and  deliver  the  territory  over  to  Catholics,  who  having  es> 
tetniinaldl  the  heretics  shall  remain  tn  peaceable  possession. 

Tliis  is  the  most  formfdable  evidence  adduced  against  the  position  which  I 
have  laid  down,  that  it  is  not  a  doctrine  o(  our  church,  that  we  are  bound  to 
perseentn  thoee  who  diflier  from  us  in  belief.  I  trust  that  I  shall  not  occupy 
very  nMci  of  jonr  time  in  showing,  that  Ibis  enactment  does  not  in  any  way 
weaknn  that  asaertion.  I  shall  do  so,  b^  satis^ing  you  that  this  is  a  special  law 
iir  a  particniar  case :  and  also  by  convincing  yoai  thnt  it  is  not  n  canon  of  the'chnrr h 
respecting  any  of  tnose  points  in  which  we  admit  her  infallibility;  nor  is  it  i 
tmmm  of  the  chnrch. 

Vbe  doctrines  condemned  in  this  irtt  canon  or^onted  in  Syria, touched  lightly 
milM  islands  of  the  Archipelago,  settled  down  in  Bulgaria,  and  spread  Into  the 
■MMli  of  £arope,bat  were  principally  received  in  thevicinttv  of  Albi,  in  France. 
Tin  ptnoaa  nondemned  held  the  Manichcan  principle  of  there  being  two  cren- 
tom  of  tiM  snivotM;  one  a  good  being,  the  antbor  of  the  New  Testament.  th« 
cnainr  of  good  nngiiti,  and  nenerally  of  spiritBal  essence;  the  other  an  evil  be- 
ing,  tbo  crMior  olllodiet,  tie  nnthor  of  the  Moaak  diapenntion.  and  generally 
ofthe  Old  TmlMMnt.  Tlieir  stated  that  marriage  was  nnlawfni.  and  co-opera- 
lion  with  tbo  ffineiple  of  evil  wns  criminal.  The  consequences  to  society  were 
of  the  very  worst  aescription,  immoral,  dismal,  and  desolating.  The  church 
tianiined  the  doctrine,  condemned  it  as  heretical,  and  cnt  off  those  who  held  or 
nbelind  It.  from  her  oommunion.  Here,  according  to  the  principles  which  I  have 
maitttained  before ^ou,  her  power  ended.  Beyond  this  we  claim  no  authority: 
the  chvreh,  by  divine  right,  we  say.  infallihlv  testiUes  what  doctrines  Chri«t  has 
rttvealed,  nmf  by  the  same  right,  in  the  same'  manner,  decides  that  what  conlra- 
diets  this  revelation  is  erroneons;  bntshe  has  no  divine  authority  to  make  a  law 
which  shall  strip  of  their  propeHy.  or  consign  to  the  executioner,  those  whom 
she  convicts  of  titror.  The  doctrine  of  onr  obligation  to  submit  does  not  extend 
to  force  us  to  submit  to  an  osurpalioo;  and  if  the  church  made  a  law  upon  a 


•irtiiect  beyond  her  commission  for  legislation  it  would  be  invalid  there  wonld 
be  t%o  proper  claim  for  onr  obedience:  nsorpation  does  not  create  a  right.  The 
council  could  by  right  make  the  doctrinal  decision;  but  it  had  no  riffht  to  make 
the  temporal  enactment:  and  where  there  exists  no  risht  to  legislate  on  one 
siile,  there  is  no  obligation  of  obedience  on  the  other.  It  this  wa*  then  a  canon 
of  the  church,  it  was  not  one  in  luakiiij  which  she  was  acting  within  her  consti- 
tutional inns'liction,  it  was  an  usurpation  of  temporal  government,  and  the  doc 
trine  of  in&llibility  does  not  bear  upon  it.  .         . . 

Every  document  respecting  this  council,  the  entire  of  the  evidence  retpectinr 
it,  as  well  as  the  very  mode  of  framing  the  enactuient:*,  prove  that  it  was  a  special 
law  r^aadiiig  a  particular  case.  The  only  persons  whose  errors  were  con- 
demned at  that  council  were  those  whom  I  have  described.  The  general  prin- 
ciple of  legal  exposition  restraining  the  application  of  penal  enactmenU  niiist 
here  have  lull  weight,  and  wilt  restrain  the  application  of  the  penalty  to  the 
only  criminals  brought  within  its  view.  But  the  evidence  is  stilt  more  confirnied, 
by  the  special  worus  of  definite  meaning,  this,  and  JUth,  which  were  specially 
descriptive  of  only  those  persons;  the  first  by  its  very  nature,  the  second  by  the 
nature  of  their  crime;  antl  the  continued  exposition  of  the  enactment  restrained 
its  application  to  the  special  case,  though  frequently  attempts  had  been  .niade 
by  individuals  to  extend  its  application,  not  in  virtue  of  the  statute,  but  in  virtue 
o'f  analogy.  It  wooJd  then  be  improperiy  forcing  its  construrtion  to  say  that  lU 
aiieretion  was  to  be  general,  as  it  evidently  was  made  only  for  a  particular  case. 

In  viewing  the  preamble  to  this  council,  as  well  as  from  our  knowledge  of 
history,  we  discover  that  this  vras  not  qaertly  a  council  of  the  church,  but  it  was 
also  a  congress  of  the  civilixed  world.  The  state  of  the  tiiu«  rendered  such 
asMinblages  not  only  usual  but  necessary:  and  each  legislative bodj>'  did  its  own 
business  by  its  own  authority;  and  very  generally  the  subjects  which  were  de- 
cided upon  by  one  body  in  one  point  of  view,  came  under  the  consideration  of 
the  other  assembly  in  a  ditferent  point  of  view,  and  their  separate  decisions  were 
engrossed  upon  a  joint  record.  ,      c  • 

Sometimes  they  were  preserved  distinct  and  separate,  but  copyists,  for  their 
own  convenience,  brought  together  all  the  articles  regarding  the  same  subject, 
from  what  source  soever  they  were  obtained.  Such  was  precisely  the  case  in 
the  instance  before  m.  There  were  present  on  this  occasion,  by  themselves  or 
by  their  legates,  the  king  of  Sicilv,  emperor  elect  of  the  Rotnans,  the  emperor  of 
the  east,  the  king  of  France,  the  king  of  England,  the  king  of  Arragon,  the  king 
of  Jerusalem,  the  king  of  Cyprus,  several  other  kings,  and  lords  paramount,  so- 
vereign states,  and  princes.  Several  of  the  bishops  were  princes  or  barons.  In 
the  ecclesiastical  council,  the  third  canon  terminated  exactly  in  one  sentence, 
which  was  that  of  the  excommunication  or  separation  from  the  church,  of  those 
whom  the  6r8t  canon  had  condemned,  whatever  name  or  names  th^  might  as- 
sume; becnnse  they  had  in  several  places  several  appellations,  and  were  con- 
tinually dividing  off  and  changing  names  as  they  separated.  The  duty  and  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  council  came  to  this;  and  the  ancient  records  pve  no  more 
as  the  portion  of  its  enactments.  But  the  congress  of  the  tcmporafpowers  then 
madetne  subsequent  partes  their  enactment:  nnd  thu«  this  penal  and  civil  re- 
gulation w«s  not  an  act  of  the  council,  but  an  act  of  the  congress  :  and  it  is  not 
a  canon  concerninff  the  doctrine  of  the  chureh,  nor  indeed  is  it  by  any  means 
n  canon,  though  the  copyists  have  added  it  to  the  canon  as  regarding  the  very 
flame  subject ;  and  as  confessedly  the  excommunication  in  the  third  canon  re- 
gurded  only  the  special  case  of  Uiose  particular  heretics,  the  addition  of  the 
penal  enactment  to  this  oarticular  canon  is  confinnatory  evidence  that  tho  • 
who  added  it  knew  that  the  penalty  in  the  one  case  was  only  co-extensive  witn 
the  excommunication  in  the  other. 

Having  thus  seen  that  this  canon  of  the  Council  of  Lateran  was  not  a  doctrinal 
decision  of  our  church  establishing  the  doctrine  of  persecution,  and  command- 
ing to  persecute,  but  that  it  was  a  civil  enactment  by  the  temporal  poweragainst 
persons  whom  they  looked  upon  as  criminals,  it  is  more  the  province  of  the  pol- 
itician or  of  the  jurist  than  of  the  divine  to  decide  upon  its  propriety.  I  ma}, 
however,  be  permitted  to  say  that  in  my  opinion  the  existence  of  civilized  socie- 
tv  required  Its  enactment,  tnough  no  good  man  can  approve  of  several  abuses 
which  were  committed  under  the  pretext  of  its  execution,  nor  c-an  any  rational 
wan  pretend  that  because  of  the  existence  of  n  special  law  for  a  oarticular  |iar 


a 


MA  BERATE   031   TlH 

|M»M,  CTeqr  case  which  amj  Im  thought  anilogoun  to  that  for  which  proviiica 
«••  inwla  IS  to  be  illrrallj  subircted  to  tbote  provi«ioos. 

We  «rc  iic*iv  arriveJat  the  nlare  where  we  mmy  eaBiljr  Ami  the  ortfin  end  th« 
estemt  of  the  mpaA  power  of  depoAinr  lOTerci^ns,  and  of  absolriug  subjcrtt 
mm  liieif  Mtis  of  allei^iaoce.    To  judje  properlv  of  lacU.  we  luiiit  know  their 

rfltl  elfCiliiMlaDcet,  not  their  men:  outiiiie.    I'he  circumstajices  of  Christen- 
I  were  then  widelj  diAer^nt  from  those  in  which  we  now  are  placed.  £uro|}« 
was  thrn  onderthe  feudal fjtieni.     I  have  seldoui  funnd  a  writer,  not  a  Cathol»c, 
who.  in  treating  of  that  afre  and  that  t^tt*  ni,  ha»  been  accurate^  and  who  ha*  Dot 
Aiiie  us  Terjr  icrioas  inmstice.  But  a  friend  of  ntine.  who  is  a  rei|icctable  meuibtr 
of  )  our  honorable  bodjr,  hat  led  nie  to  read  Hailanj's  arcount  of  it,  and  I  nmst 
mj  thai  I  have  srldoni  met  with  so  mtich  candor,  and,  what  I  call,  so  much 
tfMlk    Fmni  reading  Ilia  statement  of  that  tjstem  it  will  be  plainly  seen  that 
tlwra^tiated  amongst  the  Christian  potentates  a  sort  of  federation,  in  which  the/ 
iMMMl  themselres  by  certain  regnlatinnt,  and  to  the  observance  of  those  thcv 
W«M  held  not  mertrly  by  their  oaths  but  by  various  prnulties.  sometiuies  tbrr 
consented  the  penalty  should  be  the  loss  oi  their  station.    It  was  of  cottrsc  ue- 
ressary  to  ascertain  that  the  &ct  existed  before  its  coiisf  qu*  nces  should  be  deriared 
to  follow  ;  it  was  also  necessary  to  establish  soiue  tribunal  to  examine  and  to  de- 
cide asto  the  existence  of  the  fact  it5»-lf,  and  topro<;laim  that  exi^teuce.  Amonrst 
WMMMndent  suvereknt  there  was  no  superior,  and  it  was  natural  to  fear  that 
■Mtral  jealousy  would  create  great  diliiculty  in  selecting  a  chief;  and  that  what 
mpittlad  in  concession  might  afterwards  be  claimed  as  a  rwrht    They  wert 
liowater  all  members  of  one  church,  of  which  the  Pope  was  the  head,  and,  in 
tilt  nspactf  their  common  fiither :  and  by  universal  consent  it  was  regulated 
that  he  thouM  examine,  ascertain  the  lact,  prochim  it,  and  declare  its  conse 
i)ttences.    Thut  he  did  in  reality  possess  the  power  of  deposing  monarrbs.  and 
of  absoiring  th«ir  inbjecto  from  oaths  of  fealty,  but  only  those  nionarchs  who 
Wf n  memhem  ©f  that  federation,  and  in  the  cases  legally  provided  for.  and  by 
their  concession,  not  by  divine  right,  and  durine  the  t^nii  of  that  federation  and 
the  existence  of  his  commission.     He  governed  the  church  by  divine  rights  he 
deposed  kings  and  absolved  subiecU  from  their  allegiance  by  human  concession. 
I  preach  the  doctrines  of  my  church  by  divine  right,  but  1  preach  from  this  spot 
not  by  that  right  but  by  the  permission  of  othera. 

It  is  not  then  a  doctrine  oi  our  church  that  the  pope  has  been  divinely  com- 
itiissioned  either  to  depose  kings  or  to  interfere  with  republics,  or  to  absolve 
the  subjects  of  the  foniier  from  their  allegiance,  or  interfere  with  the  civil  con- 
cams  of  the  latter.    When  the  penccoted  English  Catholics,  under  Elixabeth. 
mma  m  Me  malior  an  unfounded  claim  to  this  right,  and  upon  the  shadow 
Of  that  unfounded  right  making  inroads  upon  their  national  independence,  by 
declarini  who  should  or  who  should  not  be  their  temporal   ruler,  they  well 
showed  how  little  they  r^rded  his  absolving  them  from  their  allegiance,  for 
they  volunteered  their  services  to  protect  their  liberties,  which  their  Catholic 
ancestors  mm  taborad  to  establish.     And  she  well  knew  that  a  Catholic  niisht 
■afely  be  eatrntted  with  the  admiralty  of  her  fleet,  and  that  her  person  waste- 
cure  amongst  her  disgraced  Catholic  nobility  and  gentry,  and  their  persecuted 
adherents ;  altboi^  the  Court  o(  Rome  had  issued  its  bull  of  absolution,  and 
■ome  divinca  were  Ibund  who  endeavored  to  prove  that  what  orklaated  in  vol- 
jataiy  eonceasioii  of  states  and  monarchs  waa  derived  from  divnic  iostitutioo. 
if  then  Elisabeth,  of  whose  character  I  would  not  wish  in  this  place  to  express 
Mr  opinion,  was  safe  amidst  thoae  whom  aba  persecuted  lor  their  <aith.  even  wkea 
m  head  of  their  church  absolved  them  firom  allegiance,  and  if  at  such  a  moment 
ey  flocked  round  her  standard  to  repel  Catholic  invadera  who  came  with  con- 
•ccrated  banners,  and  that  it  is  admitted  on  all  hands  that  in  so  doing  they  vio 
lated  no  principle  of  doctrine  or  of  discipline  of  their  churchy  as  we  all  avow 
■nrely  America  need  not  fcar  for  the  fidelity  of  her  Catholic  citizens,  whom  she 
rheritbet  and  whom  the  receives  to  her  bosom  with  affection  and  shelter*  from  the 
peraectttion  of  others.  Neither  will  anv  person  attempt  to  establish  an  analogy  be- 
**!2L**F  '"^'ration  and  that  of  feudalism,  to  argue  that  the  pope  can  do  auioiigst 
••wjatiiodidamonartt  Knropean  potentiates  under  circumstances  widely  different. 
Ilj  wonhy  opponent  saidt  that  he  would  only  touch  on  pefMeotion. 
lly  friemlt,  persecotion  had  marlied  me  for  a  ▼ictim  in  my  natire 
lamd,  and  foiced  me  to  seek  an  Asylum  in  America,  when  I  wan 
young  and  friendleai!    Persecution  is  there,  in  full  op»  ration  at  this 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    KELIOlON. 


345 


tery  hour.  Scarcely  a  breeze  cornea  across  the  ocean,  without  bring- 
*ng  on  its  wings,  fresh  tidings,  of  blood,  shed  under  Protestant  per- 
■ecution — ^by  ministers  of  the  Protestant  faith. 

Widows  there  kneel  in  the  blood  of  their  own  children ;  and,  because 
excess  of  grief  has  made  tlicm  maniacs,  they  drink  that  blood,  and 
eurse  the  authors  of  tlieir  misery.  Ls  not  this  true  !  Does  not  the 
universe  know  and  shudder  at  it  I  And  baring  been  compelled  to 
fim  from  intolerance,  having  fought  against  it,  must  we  still  see  the 
green-eyed  monster,  trampling  upon  the  vine  and  fig  tree,  here,  where 
we  had  hoped  to  sit  down  under  their  shade,  in  safety,  and  in  peace, 
with  our  brethren  of  every  denomination!  Must  we  still  fear  the 
midnight  knock  at  the  door,  and  the  domiciliary  visit,  by  a  brutal 
soldiery  1  Must  the  perishing  orphans  see  the  bread  taken  out  of 
their  mouths  by  rapacious  parsons,  and  their  mother^s  cloak  (their 
only  covering  of  a  wintry  night^  distrained,  to  pay  the  tithe  proctor  f 
Where  will  you  find  tyranny  like  Ihisl  Would  this  be  a  better  slate 
»f  things,  than  what  we,  in  this  free  country  enjoy  1  Bigots  would 
blast  this  glorious  prospect.  They  would  proscribe  one  sect  after 
another,  'fhe  appetite  for  blood,  they  have,  even  now,  evinced,  and 
we  know,  when  once  indulged,  how  hard  it  is  to  sate  it !  But  I  must 
call  upon  Protestant  testimony  for  the  wrongs  of  Ireland — and  I  will 
onlif  touch  uwn  the  persecution,  Taylor,  a  graduate  of  Trinity  Col- 
lege, in  his  nistory  of  Ireland,  says : 

**  It  would  be  a  mere  waste  of  words  to  reprobate  this  iniquitous  law,  or  ra- 
ther this  violation  of  all  law,  human  anu  divine.  No  Irish  Protestant  can  pe- 
ruse its  enactmenla  without  a  blush  for  the  shame  thus  brought  on  his  religion, 
when  it  was  thus  virtually  declared  that  the  reformed  system  should  owe  its 
strength  and  security,  not  to  the  purity  of  its  priuciples,  nut  to  the  excellence 
of  its  doctrines,  but  to  robbery  and  oppression,  to  dissentioii  between  father  and 
child,  to  stimulating  one  neighbor  to  seiie  the  fruits  of  another's  industry,  to 
the  desecration  of  a  solemn  sacrament,  by  making  it  a  test  for  office.  Mow  can  we 
be  surprised  that  the  reformed  religion  is  unpopular  in  Ireland,  when  by  this 
and  similar  laws,  a  Protestant  legislature  virtually  declared  that  Protestantism 
CoulJ  not  be  secure  unless  it  entered  into  alliance  with  Belial,  Mammon  and 
Molochr  Hitl.  of  Ireland,  By  W.  C.  Taylor,  Esq.  A.  B.  of  Trinity  college, 
Dublin,  page  108.  Vol.  2ntl.  New  York  edit.  1833. 

Now  tell  me  if  the  annals  of  Catholicism  can  produce  any  thing 
like  a  parallel  to  this  !  After  enumerating  the  most  tyrannical  laws 
that  Draco,  or  Dioclecian  ever  enacted,  can  we  discover  more  pro- 
scription— ^more  cruelty  ? 

My  friends,  I  do  not  blame  the  Protestant  religion  for  this.  It  is 
the  spirit  of  the  country  and  government ;  and  the  shame  is,  that 
when  Catholic  governments  have  ceased  to  persecute,  Protestant  ones 
eontinue  to  do  so. 

My  friends,  were  1  to  eonsult  my  own  feelings,  I  should  be  better 
pleased  to  draw  a  veil  over  these  horrors ;  but  my  opponent  made  al- 
lusions to  the  intfuisition,  as  an  argument  that,  if  ever  the  Catholics 
became  the  most  numerous,  they  would  make  it  a  part  of  their  system 
to  persecute  :  as  if  the  same  argument,  if  argument  it  can  be  called, 
would  not  be  equally  strong  against  all  the  leading  churches  of  Pro- 
testantism ;  and  if  the  gentleman  makes  any  further  extracts,  I  will 
meet  them  just  in  the  same  way,  and  condemn  both  Catholics  and 
Protestants,  for  that  by  which  they  are  alike  disgraced.  Now,  as 
he  brings  the  account  of  the  inquisition  before  us,  and  proves  it  to  be 
the  most  bloody  tyranny,  setiin"^  aside  all  forms  of  legal  procedure 
&c.,  I  %viU  lefer  you  to  Hume's  history  of  England,  for  an  inquisi- 

44 


BKBATB'  OH  Till 


ROMAN  CATnOUC    SEUGION. 


347 


i 


I 


lion  equally  terrible,  ami  more  imjast,  under  Protestant  Knrrlat  4-« 
tlie  fainoas  Btaf^Ckamlier,  where,  niMm  the  least  sospicioii,  witliont 
proof,  the  officer  was  sent  to  the  hoases  of  the  most  distinguished 
men,  nay  even  to  their  beds,  and  forced  them  in  the  dead  of  night 
to  a  prison.  Sir  Thomas  Moore,  bishop  Fisher,  the  aged  countess  of 
Salisbury,  &c.  are  instances  with  which  I  could  fill  up  some  honifio 
pages. 

la  to  oaths ;  the  gentleman  says  that  I  haw  taken  two  which  art 
Incompatible  with  each  other.  This  is  not  so.  My  ecclesiastical  oath 
ti  if  a  tmrefy  tpiriiual  nature.  The  only  oath  of  allegiance,  of  a 
lanporal  character,  which  I  haTC  ever  taken,  was  to  the  United  States. 
Theae  two  oatlis  cannot  be  incompatible.  The  heavens  and  the  earth 
•re  lot  more  different  from  one  another,  than  they  are.  They  cannot 
possibly  Interfere  with  each  othpr.  Therefore  the  bishop's  oath  is,  *y 
no  imeiifM,  what  the  gentleman  has  represented  it.  The  pope  has  ab- 
jured the  odious  sense  which  the  docnment  is  made  to  besr.  It  is  no 
sin  surely,  to  swear  that  we  will  not  kill  the  pope.  Would  my  friend 
make  it  such  !  *  Samng  my  order'  is  a  clause  which  the  gentleman 
■houM  have  expatiated  upon,  and  our  order  is  forbidden,  under  the 
iniist  awful  penalties,  to  shed  any  one's  blood,  but  our  own,  if  we  are 
called  upon  to  suffer  martyrdom,  and  that  of  the  mystic  victim  of 
the  altar,  as  a  propitiation  for  our  own  sins,  and  those  of  the  entire 
world.  Feraequmr  was  never  intended  to  mean  persecute.  It  alludes 
to  moral,  not  brute  force.  The  weapons  of  our  warfare  are  spiritual, 
mol  canal.  The  Latin  word  means  only  to  follow  up  with  persever- 
ing argument,  and  persuasion,  as  I  am  doing  this  day.  Before  I  took 
that  oath,  I  read  it  again  and  aj^in,  and  took  the  decisions  of  the 
bishops  of  America  upon  it.  We  all  agreed  that  there  was  nothing 
in  It  contrary  to  the  allegiance  due  to  the  United  States. 

My  friend  spoke  of  Catholics  violating  their  oaths.  I  would  ask 
if  there  is  a  nation  that  has  eiven  such  splendid  testimony  of  respect 
for  oaths,  as  Catholic  Ireland !  For  300  years  of  the  bloodiest  per- 
secution  that  was  ever  inflicted,  they  have  steadily  refused  to  take 
an  oath  which  every  thing  but  conscience  urged  them  to  take. 

My  friends,  all  this  ought  to  be  remembered,  not  for  the  gratifica- 
tion of  hostile  leellngs,  but  for  justice,  and  as  a  fair  offset,  to  balance 
ilw  Spanish  Inquisition,  which  is  all  the  while  not  Catholic— [Time 
expired.] 

Haffpttd  II  o^ekekf  J.  Jf. 

Mb*  Camfbxll  ntef*- 

We  liav«^  my  friends,  had  matter  of  debate  thrown  before  os  dnrng 
iM  last  hoar,  that  would  require  seven  days  more  to  discuss*  An 
ocean  Instead  of  a  harbor  opens  to  our  view.  Good  policy,  however ' 
Instead  of  concentrating  fM  liie  main  points,  which,  above  all  others. 
It  behooved  tlie  bishop  to  clear  np^  If,  indeed,  he  had  any  hopes  of  being 
able  to  defend  himself,  he  gives  ns  a  little  of  every  thing,  great  and 
■mall ;  present,  past,  and  future.  Thirty  roinntea  would  not  be  enough 
for  me  to  single  out,  arrange,  and  state  the  contrary  propositions,  to 
eover  all  his  last  premises.  As  the  gentleman  knows  what  he  can  best 
defend,  and  what  he  cannot,  and  as  his  lime  is  at  his  own  disposal,  I 
have  no  right  to  complain*  I  proceed,  therefore,  not  to  recapitulate 
my  argument,  as  I  expected  we  hoth  woaid  have  done  in  oor  kst 


epeeches :  hot  to  bmsh  the  dost  off  a  few  of  the  prominent  ptiints, 
erowded  together  in  his  last  effort. 

The  bishop^s  denial  of  the  genuineness  of  this  Rhemish  Testament, 
at  this  time,  is  exceedingly  unfair;  and  still  worse,  from  whatever  mo- 
tive it  may  proceed,  it  is  wholly  reckless  of  history  and  fact.  I  say  it 
is  unfair  f  because,  when  near  the  beginning  of  the  debate,  I  showed 
him  the  Testament,  and  challenged  him  to  object  to  it  if  he  had  any- 
thing against  it,  that  it  might  be  settled  forthwith,  he  was  silent.  I 
went  even  farther — ^I  asked  him  for  another  copy,  or  edition  of  it  more 
correct,  if  be  had  one :  he  was  still  silent.  And  now,  at  the  close,  he 
baa  held  up  the  Douay  Bible,  without  these  notes,  published  long 
since,  not  pretending  to  be  the  same  work,  either  as  to  time,  place,  or 
eircumstance,  as  proof  that  this  edition  of  the  New  Testament  is  not 
authentic!  But  my  audience,  and  the  public,  will  appreciate  all  this. 
I  do  assert,  then,  and  my  assertion  has  as  much  logic  in  it  as  his,  that 
the  gentleman  has  misrepresented  this  affair — that  this  book  is  truly 
what  its  title  page  declares  it;  and  that  both  the  text  and  the  notes  are 
as  truly  Roman  Catholic  as  the  Douay  Bible.     Hear  the  tiile: 

"The  Ntw  Testanu  Dt  of  our  Lord  and   Savior  Jesus  Christ;  tran-latcd  o«t 


Again:  hear  the  recommendation  of  this  work  by  "ministers  of  the 
gospel,  and  other  learned  persons  of  various  denominations."  They 
say,  "This  edition  contains  all  the  notes  of  the  original  edition  as  pub- 
lished at  Rheims,  A.  D.  1582."  Not  a  new  and  amended  impression, 
suppressing  the  more  offensive  comments,  but  the  original  itself.  This 
recommendation  is  signed  by  more  than  a  hundred  gentlemen  of  as 
much  literary  and  religious  reputation  as  can  be  found  in  the  U.  States. 

Once  more :  .    «.      .  . 

CKRTincATB. — ^We  have  compared  this  New  York  edition  of  the  Rhemish 
Testament  and  Annotations  with  the  first  fHiblic«tion  of  that  volume,  which  was 
iaaued  at  Rheims  in  1582;  and  after  examination,  we  do  hereby  rertifr,  that  the 
present  rc-print  it  an  exact  and  faithful  copv  of  the  original  work,  without 
abridgment  or  addition,  except  that  the  Latin  of  a  few  phrases  which  were  trans- 
lated by  the  annotalors:  and  some  unimportant  expletive  words  were  undesign- 
edly omitted.    The  orthography  also  has  been  modernixed. 

^  John  Brkckinridok. 

William  C.  Browwlee.D.  D. 
Thomas  De  Witt,  D.  D. 
DuKCAN  Dunbar. 
Archibaiji  M aclat. 

WlLUAM  PATTON. 

To  all  these  certificates  there  are  not  less  than  one  hundred  and  t^rfjf 
mmmm.  But  the  gentleman's  calling  this  authority  in  question,  is  in 
good  keeping  with  his  whole  course.  There  is  no  authority  acrainst 
the  church  of  Rome — neither  Protestant  nor  Catholic  to  be  believed, 
if  they  say  any  thing  against  her.  But  infidels,  and  such  Protestants 
as  flatter  her  in  her  assumptions,  are  canonical  as  holy  writ!  If  the 
bishop  is  to  be  believed,  all  Protestant  historians,  theologians,  authors, 
ftc.  opposed  to  the  Roman  assumptions,  are  Kan*  In  proof  and  de- 
monstration of  the  super-excellency  of  Protestant  principles,  and  of  the 
debasing,  degrading,  and  enslaving  principles  of  the  papacy,  I  intended 
to  have  drawn  a  full  comparison  between  the  Protestant  and  Catholic 
parts  of  Ireland;  the  Protestant  and  Catholic  countries  of  Switzer- 
land—between  Spain,  Italy,  Portugal,   anji   Protestant   England— 


348 


DBBATB  m  TBB 


Jjitwwn  lilt  UnitiHi  StatM  and  iIm  Smiai  Aracrieaii  Stafc,— , 
Protestant  mnd  Roman  Catholic  Amerioi.  But  I  cannot  now  mtummpl 
It;  aid  nueh  do  I  mgm  it!  for  such  aeonaparison  fiiiriy  drawn,  would 
•nioiint  to  Ibe  iMat  aatitfactory  demonstniuon  of  the  political,  literarr, 
•ad  moral  tendemaiea  of  the  two  tysiema.  Plain,  as  proof  from  hofr 
writ.  It  would  thus  have  appeared,  that  this  superaUlioa,  Hke  the  touch 
Of  the  torpedo,  lays  a  beouoibinjr,  pardkinf,  md  blifhtinff  hand  on 
HI  within  Its  ffraap.  «      « 

1  ■•  fiMlMiian  IS  yet  on  indnlfemses  and  purgatory,  when  he  onffht. 
in  reply  to  my  last  speech,  to  ha? e  endeavored,  if  possible,  to  r«liev« 
Ms  cause  from  imputations  the  most  serious  and  the  most  revolting  to 
ABMrinn  ears.  I  have  not  thought  it  important  to  descant  upon  the 
tanlTof  ains,  or  to  give  a  tabalar  view  of  the  prices  at  which  certain 
•ins  were  rated  in  gold  and  silver  in  the  market  of  indulgences.  Nor 
Have  1  at  all  inquired  why,  in  this  lax-book,  for  killing  atayman  a  less 
Sf 'ir'^  **'"/*''  simply  striking  a  priest,  without  breaking  the 
•itii.  Ilicie  UMtions,  though  capable  of  solutioiLfrom  authentic  docn. 
aentt,  ■»  tin  dieams  of  purgatory  I  deem  so  inferior,  and  so  un^ 
blushingiy  hanfaeed  impositions,  that  I  prefer  matters  of  more  grave 
conwn  to  this  community  for  the  time  allotted  us.  That  indulgences 
■»  iona  fide  licenses  to  commit  sin,  and  not  simple  absolution  for  past 
•ins,  is  as  susceptible  of  proof  as  that  Mardn  Luther  began  the  Protes- 
tant  reformation.  * 


new  tueir  crowns  at  the  sovereign  pleasure  of  the  popes,  is  just  as  oh- 
I!!!l*  1**'?!''"*^  ?«S»«  ^hat  there  were  popes  at  all.    Sometimes,  in 

!!!f iJilr*"^  f  "f*'^  •«^'"**  ^^.  iMumptions,  and  sometimes  they 
•OMWMed.  But  the  ready  aubwIinatioR  of  the  state  to  the  church 
Wljwed  in  the  magistrates  eieeaang  the  anathemas  of  the  church,  in 
pitting  to  d^th  those  denoted  as  heretics  by  the  church,  shows  in  what 
a  slale  ofsubserviency  and  pliancy  political  priiwes  were  held  by  the 
ppet.  That  is  just  the  very  krrw  of  chuieh  and  state—the  very 
aipimiacy  which  we  fear,  and  which  is  so  antipodal  to  onr  institutions. 

.  T  l^"!^"*  I»««^««  or  reformers  to  death,  and  supporting  a  homan 
pnesthood  by  the  state  according  to  the  dictadon  of  the  church,  which 
mates  that  anion,  or  subserviency,  so  wicked  and  odious  in  our  estiraa. 
tion.  And  will  the  gentleman  ask,  what  Roman  Catholic  state,  nation, 
or  pnnoe,  ever  did  such  a  thing ! !  »  » 

In  his  MMBiii  diipiay t  of  Roman  Catholie  doctrine,  my  friend  has 
Ml  pven  yoo  the  Irane-Alpine  doctrine.  The  Cis-Alpine,  or  Gallican 
doctors,  aie  not  of  the  old  Roman  Catholic  aehool.  Ihm  ara  almoot 
»emi.pioieMant  on  those  very  points  on  which  he  has  introdneed  them. 
Thm  are  no  evidence  against  the  standaid  doetrinea  of  that  chureh 
on  th«!e  questions.  The  French  Catholics  began  to  stand  aloof  from 
Mie  high  and  haughty  ntaleniiions  of  their  trans-montane  brethren. 
They  are  the  most  liberal  portion  of  the  Roman  church,  and  have,  con- 
lequently,  done  more  for  the  promotion  of  science  than  all  the  rest  of 
the  Catholic  world  put  together.    Bishop  England  gives  their  views. 

I  asked  for  an  authentic  disclaimer  of  the  attributes  of  the  Roman 
church,  and  of  those  acts  and  deeils  indicative  of  her  tyrannical,  op. 
pressive  and  persecuting  spirit  whiiOi  I  hive  detailed.  1  ask  this  sUir 


SOMAN    CATHOLIC    RKLfGION. 


349 


tad  while  f  do  it  in  a  tone  indfcattve  of  that  earnestness  ^which  the 
oeeasion  requires,  I  do  it  in  the  same  benevolence  to  my  opponent  and 
his  party  which  1  felt  and  expressed  at  the  beginning  of  this  discus- 
sion. The  times  and  the  occasion  peremptorily  demand  it.  We  know 
what  individual  priests  and  bishops  have  said  against  popes  and  coun- 
eils,  and  their  proceedings,  and  against  other  parts  of  that  system:  but 
these  are  said  for  effect  ad  captandum  vulgus^  and  will  be  unsaid  by 
the  same  individuals,  or  by  others,  when  occasion  requires.  1  have 
brought  very  serious  allegations  against  the  Roman  Catholic  institu- 
tion, and  authorities  for  them — all  of  them  authentic,  and  most  of  them 
never  disputed  by  my  opponent.  He  disclaims  these  principles,  acts 
and  movements :  but  he  disproves  not  one  of  them.  Nor  would  the 
dtsclaimitig  of  them  by  all  the  bishops  in  America,  disprove  one  of 
them.  The  council  of  Trent  has  ordained  and  enjoined  all  these  prin- 
ciples of  implicit  and  blind  obedience,  intolerance,  proscription,  and 
persecution.  No  council  has  since  met,  and  no  power  but  a  general 
council  can  define  a  single  article  of  faith,  or  rale  of  manners,  accord- 
ing to  the  declarations  of  my  antagonist.  Indeed,  the  doctrine  of  the 
council  of  Trent  must  remain  immutable  and  infallible  while  time  en- 
dures, according  to  him :  for  no  other  general  council  can  possibly 
contravene  it ;  and,  therefore,  while  the  Roman  church  exists,  she 
must  be,  what  1  have  shown  she  was,  before  and  since  the  council  of 
Trent. 

This  council  met  in  a  boisterous  time.  They  met  to  oppose  and  put 
down  Protestantism.  They  knew  the  allegations  of  Protestants 
aj^ainst  their  doctrine.  If  then,  they  could  have  abandoned  those  prin- 
ciples for  the  sake  of  either  reclaiming  or  defeating  the  Lutlierans, 
that  was  the  time  to  do  it.  They  sat  long  enough,  and  debated  with 
seal  enough  ;  and  yet  they  dare  not  discuss  the  papal  authority.  The 
pope  forbade  them  to  debate  his  office,  jurisdiction,  or  authority,  and 
they  did  not  attempt  it.  The  pope  signed  their  decrees,  and  all  that  was 
done  there  was  done  irrevocably  and  forever.  The  disavowal  or  the 
disclaiming  of  any  priest  or  bishop  in  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  is 
not  worth  more,  and  has  no  more  authority,  than  mine.  It  is,  therefore, 
of  no  value  for  my  learned  opponent,  or  any  American  prelate  to  say 
that  be  does  not  approve  this  or  that;  or,  agree  to  this  or  that.  They 
must  all  submit  to,  and  they  will  all  inculcate  on  all  suitable  occa- 
sions, every  decree  of  the  council  of  Trent.  Thus  did  the  Jesuits  in 
Abyssinia.  They  first  explained  away  every  thing :  but  finally  ex- 
plained it  back  again,  and  had  almost  saddled  the  pope  and  the  coun- 
eil  of  Trent  forever  on  those  unfortunate  Abyssinians.  • 

I  could,  had  I  the  time  now,  from  that  very  history  of  Ireland  from 
which  the  gentleman  read  you  an  extract,  a  copy  of  which  I  too  have 
lying  on  the  table,— I  say,  I  can  from  this  book  show  that  the  ancient 
ehristian  church  of  Ireland  was  subjugated  to  the  church  of  Rome,  by 
this  very  species  of  rhetoric,  and  that  finally  the  whole  island  was 
enslaved  to  the  pope  by  the  same  means:  for  in  England,  Scotland, 
Wales,  and  Ireland,  there  were  Christian  churches,  ages  before  the 
popes  of  Rome  were  born.  But  by  this  chamelion  attribute  of  becom- 
ing all  things  to  all  men,  for  a  while,  she  has  made  all  men  become 
what  she  pleases. 

Thus  by  degrees  under  this  system,  the  human  spirit  is  broken,  de- 
faded  and  debased,  night  ensues,  and  finally,  gross  darkness  covers 
2E 


350 


OIBATC   O^   THE 


I 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION 


351 


tlm  fMiople.    BTtn  in  Cftnaila  tiiMse  iIm  ptpaey  bap  §^md  llie  iseeiMi- 
•ocj,  laws  bate  hem  piiiil  ia  tlit  pmnmm  aweBifciiia,  giving  to 


■oiiiiol  fkoiQuitssioneni  aod  frand  jurors  tiio  privilegie  of**  mamng  ii 
'wmrkf  instead  tf  writing  thar  name*  /"    Nothings  can  preserve  our  in- 

piliii«aii  inaiiluiliNis  but  a  sysiem  of  intellectual  and  mcral  cnltnrei 
aoMitilik  tiammj  child  boro  upon  our  soil  or  brought  to  oiir  shores* 
IlnlMS  we  thus  benevolently  co-operate  in  this  great  cause  of  human* 
ily,  this  last  and  best  hope  of  the  oppressed  of  all  nations  will  vanish 
from  the  earth,  and  a  new  and  ghostly  despotism  sball  arise  and  ex- 
tMiii  its  iron  sceptre  over  this  our  beloved  land.  Nothing  but  intalli« 
giiMe  anl  virtue  universallv  diffused,  can  save  us  from  Uiis  dread  ca- 
tastioplie.  In  Prolettant  Prussia,  with  a  Roman  Catholic  minority* 
they  understand  so  well  the  importance  and  utility  of  education,  and 
its  power  to  dissipate  the  darkness  of  superstition,  always  tyrannical, 
that  every  child  is  by  law  compelled  to  be  educated,  and  that  morally 
•a  well  as  intellectually. 

There  remains  an  important  point  or  two  yet  to  be  noticed.  The 
fltntlenan  m  exceediugly  squeamish  in  Ua  avowals  of  this  oath,  which 
iiivvar  bimis  the  Roman  priesthood  to  the  court  of  Rome.  He  admits, 
however,  thai  iiDter  due  coiisullntion  or  meditation  liud  lie  touk  tlie 
oath,  clauwis  of  which  conKiriiin  him  to  **  increase  and  advauce  the 
auilioi-ity  of  the  pope,'*  aiitl  to  **  persecute  tiiid  oppo.«<e  heretics  and 
schiMiMtictt/*     He  tttiys  pertefuor  means  nut  to  per!<ecate. 

Bisuop  I'uKCKLL.    It  iiieaiM  to  follow,  and  iiuthiiig  more. 

14 w.  Camphkll.  It  is  a  generic  term,  tuid  means  to  follow  with  the 
swonl  or  fHi;^n<'^  ^^  ^h*^  hand  or  foot,  only  in  the  way  of  opposition, 
however.  «!>«fif<ir  is  lo  follow,  but  permqu&r  m  to  follow  with  veu- 
gVMiioe* 

I  have  learned  this  morning  thai  il  can  be  proved  under  oath  that  all 
th«  btuhoiM  ill  America  have  taken  this  otith;  and  ihiil  without  eqiiivo- 
catioM  or  lueutitl  reserrulion ;  of  which  fad,  however,  I  was  before 
apprised;  bill  the  {leuilcmau  himitelf  has  admitted  it,  and  I  pnraue  il 
no  furtlier.  I  am,  however,  disapfioin ted  to  obi^erve  that  he  lia;i  been 
at  no  paiiisi  to  reconcile  his  allcj^iance  to  two  governments  so  singu- 
hirlv  repngnant  to  each  other  in  all  tlieir  elements  and  tendencies. 

M J  friend  ied  from  persecution  in  Ireland!  From  paving  «/^A/jr,  1 
Mfipoie,  aeeeniing  to  the  Levitical  law  \  Well,  this  tiihe  system  is 
a  falling  oonoem,  and  will  soon  pass  away.  But  is  not  tliis,  his  perse* 
anliou,  an  ingenloas  off-sel  to  ifty  millions  of  martyrs  sacriliced  by 
tlie  papal  pewerf  I  Some  are  whispering  thai  this  Homau  persecu* 
ting  splrll  is  dying  away  as  the  tithe  sysiem.  Lei  those,  however, 
who  Ihink  so,  in  addition  to  what  I  have  already  read  from  va* 
rious  sources,  accept  a  few  words  from  the  "Plea  for  itie  West**— 
from  the  M  ed,  of  M.  Aiguan,  of  the  French  Academy  in  Paris, 

"Passing  to  the  10th  artiele  of  the  A»Meor<l«ir,  in  whioh  it  is  said  that 

his  Most  Christian  Miyesly  shall  •mploy,in  eoaeert  with  the  Holy  Father, 
all  the  means  In  hii  power  to  eaase  to  oease,  as  soon  as  possible,  all  tha 
iiaerders  pu^  ohstaelet  whioh  ohstruot  the  welfare  of  religion  and  the 
•zeeation  of  the  laws  of  the  ehurch — were  [the  Protestants]  to  ask  (al- 
though the  profuse  shedding  of  their  blood  might  have  informed  them). 
What  are  the  laws  of  the  churoh  7  The  aolf  of  Pins  VII.  himself,  and 
the  writings  on  which  the  ehurch  rests  her  authority,  would  answer,  thb 
tZTaaifiifATioN  OF  naaiiics,  thi  cowriaoATiow  op  vniia  ooona,  lan 
mra  raiVAViON  op  evkry  civil  peivilbob." 
¥•  this  fha  author  •ubjoins  a  aute :  *»Ci:rtaiu  portions  of  real  estate  which  had 


belonged  to  ecclesiastics,  had  pa«Md  into  the  hapds  of  Protestant  princes.  Pius  VII. 
in  18(^,  compUlned  of  it  to  his  nuncio  residing  at  Virhnaisnd  reminded  him  that, 
according  to  tlie  laws  of  IIm  cbarcli,  not  only  cootd  not  heretics  posi»esa  ec- 
rlesiasticai  property,  but  that  also  they  couH  not  possess  any  property  whatever, 
since  the  crime  of  heresy  ou»ht  to  be  punished  by  the  confiscation  of  roods. 
fie  added  that  the  subjects  ofa  prince,  who  is  a  heretic,  should  be  released  from 
every  duty  to  him,  freed  from  all  oblig:ation  and  all  homage.  *  In  truth,'  said  he, 
*  we  have  fallen  on  times  so  calamitous,  and  so  humiliating  to  the  spouse  of  Jesus 
Christ,  that  it  is  not  possible  for  her  to  practise,  nor  expedient  to  recall  so  holy 
nwKims;  an<i  she  is  forced  to  interrupt  the  course  of  her  just  severities  against 
the  enemies  of  the  faith.  But  if  she  cannot  exercise  her  right  to  depose  the 
pirtizans  of  heresy  from  their  principalilies,and  declare  that  they  have  (prfeited 
all  their  goods;  can  she  ever  permit  that,  to  enrich  themselves,  they  should 
despoil  her  of  her  osm  proper  ooniiaions?  What  a  subject  of  derision — would 
she  not  present  to  these  vtry  heretks  and  unbelievers,  who,  wbiie  they  ins'-lted 
her  grief,  would  sa^  they  had  discovered  the  method  of  rendering  her  tolerant? 

"The  same  pontiff  in  bis  instructions  to  his  agents  in  Polaod.  given  in  180ft, 
professes  this  doctrine,  that  the  laws  of  the  church  do  not  recognize  any  civil 
privileges  as  belongin<|^  to  persons  not  Catholic;  that  their  marriages  are  not 
valid;  that  they  can  live  only  in  concubinage:  that  their  children,  being  has* 
lards,  are  incapacitated  to  inherit;  that  the  Catholics  themselves  are  not  validly 
married,  except  tliey  are  united  according  to  the  rules  prescribed  by  the  court  of 
Rome;  and  that,  when  they  are  married  according  to  tnese  rules,  their  luarrii^^a 
is  valid,  had  they  in  other  respects  infringed  all  the  laws  of  their  country." — 
Quarterly  Register,  vol.  3.  p.  89. 

Remember  then,  that  according  to  the  acts  of  Pins  VIT.  the  laws  of 
the  church  &till  command  the  extermination  of  heretics — the  cfmfiseation 
of  their  goods,  and  their  deprivation  (^  every  privilege — thai  Froltsta$iU 
mane  no  privilege*  ;  and  that  the  present  calm  is  owing,  not  to  a  change 
of  spirit,  but  of  times :  for  says  the  pope :  **  the  time§  are  90  calamitous 

that  the  ehurch  is  forced  to  interrupt  the  amrse  of  her  just  severities 
agaimt  the  enemies  or  the  faith  V"  These  are  truly  calamitous 
times !  !^   Alas  for  prosperous  days ! 

I  am  indeed  sorry  that  our  debate  has  been  so  much  out  of  logical 
order.  An  issue  has  never  been  fairly  and  fully  formed  on  one  of  my 
propositions.  My  friend  occupied  the  ground  which  he  chose.  He 
was  respondent.  How  he  has  responded,  it  remains  for  others  to 
judge.  He  has  been  positive  and  declamatory  enough,  and  very  aero- 
pulous  about  **  mint,  anise  and  cummin  :**  but  how  have  the  great  to- 
pics been  met  ?  I  rejoice,  however,  that  it  will  go  to  the  public,  as  it 
was  spoken,  and  that  the  public  wiU  read  and  judge. 

I  have  heard  a  hint  that  the  gentleman  is  about  to  disprove  the  fact 
of  the  anathema  or  bi8hop*s  curse  by  introducing  Sterne,  turning  into 
ridicule  the  curses  pronounced  eenturiee  before  he  was  born.  The 
hnmor  of  Sterne  found  the  reality  of  the  curse,  or  he  woold  not  have 
laughed  at  it. 

The  gentleman  has  now  to  elose  the  debate.  The  usages  of  diaeos- 
eion  forbid  the  introduction  of  new  matter  in  the  last  speech.  He  will 
rohabiy  again  tell  you  of  Catholic  devotion  to  American  liberty,  and 
f  his  brother  soldiers,  that  fought  in  the  Revolutionary  war.  For,  by 
such  arguments  he  has  generally  met  the  decrees  of  councils,  the  bulla 
of  oopes,  the  records  of  history,  and  the  precepts  of  the  apostles.  But 
before  the  devotion  of  a  few  Roman  Catholic  soldiers  to  the  cause  of 
the  Revolution  can  be  accepted  as  proof  of  Roman  Catholic  love  of 
either  civil  or  religious  libierty,  it  must  be  ascertained,  whether  the 
hatred  of  Protestant  England,  rather  than  the  love  of  rational  liberty, 
instigated  those  soldiers  that  served  during  that  war.    For  my  part,  1 


i\ 


•1 


<;il 


*\ 


.If  BnA  I  IS     MJ*%      f  II K 


ilMllM  to  tlie  opinion  thnl  llie  bntred  of  England  was  at  least  at  strong 
«i  iaplnr  to  tlmi  eimfta  an  tlm  lot •  of liteny^-^Bttt— [Tinm  ex- 

■imi*  J 

My  friends,  in  order  to  meet  one  of  the  last  allegfatioDS  of  the  gen- 

in«  naneij,  that  the  Catholic  church  has  a  law,  making  Proteal- 

children  illeg ilimate ;   I  know  of  no  law  to  that  effect,  which  ad« 

its  of  the  least  practical  difficulty ;  but  I  will  tell  you  where  it  it 
■ii  if  '§nmf  wai  Inipoees  civil  disabilities  and  diaciaalifications  of  the 
OMiel  niiiNit  charaeter.  It  it  in  a  Ptotestant  country.  And,  here,  let 
■•  any,  once  for  all,  that  I  judge  too  highly  of  the  character  of  8coi»- 
nen  and  Knglishmen,  and  know  too  well  that  they  detest  these  laws 
IS  much  as  f  do,  to  mean  anything  disrespectful  to  them,  when  I  al- 
lude to  the  acts  of  the  British  governoient,  or  the  malpnicticcs  of  iii- 
dividuala.  Scotland  has  done  much  for  science.  Eagle>like  she  has 
icwied  to  its  sunniest  heights.  May  she  battle,  like  the  Bruce,  by  the 
side  of  0*Connell,  for  human  rights.  But,  facts  are  facts.  Nov;*, 
a  Unitarian  minister,  Mr.  Dewey,  whom  I  have  already  quoted,  sa^s : 

**Tht!diks«'nter»  are  d«iiiaiidiii|^  to  b«  rvlifVfMl  fruiii  titcir  hunit^ut.  Ffctittuni 
to  parliamriit,  either  Ibr  aii  entire  abolitiun  of  the  union  bf  tween  church  and 
slate,  or  Cor  an  ett«enttat  modification  of  that  union,  havf,  it  it  well  kiidwot  be* 
come  mattera  of  almost  every  day  occiinreiMW.  There  it  a  determination  on  thii 
poimi,  wbieb  hmmI  al  lenrth  tucceed;  aad  I  niiiit  t«y.  indeed,  from  my  own  iii;< 
pf—lmHii  abnat  thr  kanuhiy*  of  the  cate,  that  if  the  dissentem — ii'  those  whose  con. 
JtlfiimattdfMfCrlf  auil  per$omU  reqttet^Uity  are  alike  invaded  by  the  rhurcb 
Mlabliahnient,  ivilt  not  cause  their  voice,  and  the  voice  of  justice  to  be  beard,  they 

dtacrve  to  be  oppressed... If  the  church  eodownienis  were  a  bequest  for  the 

benefit  of  any  particutar  class  of  christians,  it  was  fur  the  Catholics.    The  hut* 
mmi  portioo  of  tli«w  were  actually  Catholic  endowments,    if  it  b  proper  that 
mmf  tlMMild  be  divailcd  inoni  that  originiil  desi|(n  at  all,  it  ought  at  least  to  ba 
dona  ill  aid  and  ftirthcmnce  of  the  whole  rel^ion  of  the  country  ......No  mam 

I  Ibinkc  iSMi  tratnl  through  this  countrjr  without  Icnowing  that  the  dissenters  are 
ilfniwotiv  treated  in  a  manner  anountiiurto  absolute  indignity !  As  to  the  m> 
Jmmm  m  the  ty stent,  it  is  well  known.  Thn  distefiter  is  eicluded  fiom  the  uni* 
ttnititS.  In  iact,  km  tma  aeilher  be  born,  nor  baptized,  nor  married,  nor  buried, 
bat  awkr  the  opMObtMia  <yf  the  law.  That  is  to  say,  there  can  le  no  leg^al  nt^i** 
tratioa  of  his  birtli;  Us  baptiauMil  certificate  does  nut  entitle  him  to  le^^al  marriage  t 
•ad  be  can  receive  neither  niarriase,  nor  burial  from  the  hands  of  his  own  pastor. 

And  BOW  trhnl  is  alle|iad  in  defence  of  this  state  of  things?  No  princifjle  or 
ptelaace  of  jastice  that  I  have  ever  heard,  but  only  the  principle  of  eipe<li- 
eaej.  it  is  said  that  monopoly  and  eBclnsMui  here  are  necessary.  It  it  said  that 
religion  cannot  be  Mpoorled  in  dignily  and  honor,  without  ample  endowmeAla 
nnd  rich  beneices.**    Vol.  1.  p.  14X 

Such  is  the  state  of  England  in  the  enllg[htened  nineteenth  century, 
nnda  Pielty  state  it  certainly  is !  Thus,  on  incontrovertible  testimony, 
Hint  of  the  nation  at  large,  are  monopoly  and  exclusion  necessary  to  the 
support  af  a  ayatem  which  Mr.  Campbell  has  solemnly  declared  to  be 
the  onlj  bulwark  of  the  Protestant  religion ! ! 

Mv  mends,  for  those  tremendous  curses  which  you  have  heard,  and 
at  which  you  have  laughed  so  heartily  !  I  must  spoil  or  heighten  the 
fun  by  telling  you  that  they  are  not  Catholic  curses,  nor  yet  Protest 
taut  curses  exactly,  but  that  they  are  the  Jeu  d*esprit  of  a  Protestant 
ninisier,  Lawrence  Sterne,  all  found  in  this  book  (exhibiting  it,) 
whieli  1  have  had  brought  me,  this  moment,  from  a  book  store,  written 
liy  thai  worthy  parson  himself,  and  one  of  the  most  grossly  obscene 
in  the  English  language  ! !  Verily,  my  opponent  has  given  me,  in  this 
iiiale,  a  measure  of  revenge  which  i  would  not,  myself,  have  asked 


BOXAN  CATflOUC    BELIGION. 


353 


ibr.  And  he  had  these  cnrses,  stowed  away  for  years,  on  that  bit  of 
•oiled  paper,  to  be  produced  as  the  tmtp  de  grace  to  the  Catholics,  al 
the  close  of  this  debate.  I  saw  these  curses,  when  some  waggish 
wight  had  them  published,  in  Philadelphia ;  and  the  moment  he  men- 
tioned them,  I  wrote  on  my  notes,  "  Sierne,"  ♦*  Tristram  Shandy,"  and 
sent  for  the  book !  Dr.  Slop  cuts  his  finger,  untying  a  certain  case  of 
instruments:  he  whistles  Lillebulero,  to  ease  the  pain;  and  Uncle 
Toby,  or  his  nephew,  with  Cervanlic  gravity,  swears  by  Juno^s  beard 
to  Die  genuineness  of  these  curses,  and  hands  them  to  Dr.  Slop,  to 
read  by  way  of  an  anodyne !  But,  seriously,  in  the  28th  chapter  of 
Deuteronomy,  are  to  be  found  curses,  as  awful  as  these  here  pro- 
lounccd.  Must  we  mock  God  that  inspired,  or  the  scripture  that  re- 
cords them!  Now  the  bible  itself  is  turned  into  ridicule  by  the  gentleman 
Christian  charity  and  common  sense,  truth  and  justice,  require  im- 
peratively, that  no  one  should  be  condemned  without  a  hearing,  oi 
charged  with  holding  sentiments  which  he  disavows.  Here  is  the 
fullest,  the  clearest,  the  most  unequivocal  disavowal,  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  pope^s  deposing  power.  The  Catholics  do  not  believe  that  he 
has  any  such  power.  We  would  be  among  the  first  to  oppose  him  in 
its  exercise ;  and  we  would  be  neither  heretics  nor  bad  Catholics ;  and 
we  each  of  us  bishops  swear  the  very  words  of  the  oath :  ^^Fersequar 
d  impugnabo,  salm  meo  ordinct*^  in  the  sense  specified,  which  is  the 
only  true  sense,  the  assumption  of  any  such  power  by  the  pope,  or  the 
pope  for  the  assumption  of  any  such  power.    Fon  ten  centuries  this 

POWER  WAS  NEVER  CLAIMED  BY  ANY  POPE.      1t  CAN,  THERSrORE,  BE  NO 

PART  OP  Catholic  doctrine.    It  has  not  gained  one  foot  op  land 

POR  THE  POPE.      It   is   NOT  ANY  WHERE   BELIEVED,   OR  ACTED   UPON,   IN 

THE  Catholic  church.  Nor  can  it  be,  at  this  late  day,  estab- 
lished, IP  ANY  MAN  COULD  BE  FOUND  MAD  ENOUGH  TO  MAKE  THE  AT- 
TEMPT. Let  these  go  before  the  American  people,  as  the  real  princi- 
ples of  Catholics  concerning  the  power  of  the  pope.  And  if  we  must 
pronounce  a  judgment  on  the  past,  let  it  be  remembered,  that  when 
the  pope  did  use  this  power,  it  was  when  appealed  to  as  a  common 
father^  and  in  favor  of  the  oppressed !  We  should  go  back,  in  spirit, 
to  former  times,  when  we  undertake  to  judge  them.  We  should  un- 
derstand the  condition  of  society  at  the  period  ;  we  should  know  the 
circumstances,  general  and  particular,  which  controlled  or  influenced 
the  great  events  recorded  in  history.  We  should  not  c|uarrel  with  our 
ancestors,  because  they  did  not  possess  knowledge  which  we  possess; 
nor  flatter  ourselves  that  we  are  vastly  their  better"  because  of  these 
adventitious  advantages;  while  they  manifestly  surpass  us  in  others 
of  greater  value,  to  the  Christian,  the  moralist,  the  artist.  They  had 
tlie  substance  of  good  things :  we  seem  to  be  content  with  the  shadow 
of  them.  The  very  efforts  now  made  by  fanatical  preachers,  and  pe- 
titioners to  congress,  to  proscribe  Roman  Catholics,  clearly  show  that 
we  arb  ftir  behind  them  in  the  regard  for  truth,  and  the  exercise  of 
toleiatttHi.  Let  it  never  be  forgotten,  what  the  sect  was^  of  what  reli* 
gum  tht  men  were,  who  first  petitioned  congress,  in  this  free  country,  to 
reitriet,  i  r,  to  use  a  more  appropriate  word,  to  abolish  liberty  of  conseientKf 
and  tofwrn  a  Christian  party  in  politics.  They  were  not  Roman  Catholics. 
The  B%'1  of  Oregory  XVL  censures  bad  books.  He  condemns  not 
the  liberty  Hut  the  licentiousness  of  the  press.  And  is  he  not  riffht ! 
Can  there  bt  «  greater  corrupter  of  morals  than  bad  books  1  Did  not 
2k9  23 


DEBATE  OH  Tllfl 

81.  Pivl  Imin  Iml  boolit  to  tho  nnoiiiit  of  MOO  pieces  of  ■ifTer ,  as  ws 
Itaii  in  Acts  lis.  19!  Is  it  not  sctioiMble  in  Bnfland  and  the  Unttf;il 
Slates  to  publish  books  against  the  existence  of  God!  You  see  what 
•ne^ided  ticws,  some  would  be  great  men  can  take,  of  the  doings  of 
f9^m*  Tho  gentleman  blew  up  the  bible,  and  all  tlie  mysteries  of 
ehristtanitjr,  and  himself  with  them,  when  he  tried  to  blast  the  rock 
of  Peter;  is  it  wonderful  that  he  should  implicate  St.  Paul,  and  Eng- 
liah  and  American  common  and  statute  law,  when  he  would  blow  up 
tlie  good  old  pope,  Gregory  XVI.  I 

In  ■  leacript  addressed  bj  his  holiness  Pius  YIL  to  the  Ticars  apon- 
ti^  of  Great  Britain,  dated  the  8th  of  April,  1820,  his  holiness  ex* 

-  11w  faithfiil  abttaiii  from  rcwiiiif  tb«  wicked  books,  in  which  in  thcM  calua. 
lioias  times,  our  r«l%ion  is  assailed  from  all  sides;  and  that  thejr  should  be  strength- 
ened in  &ith  and  woodworks,  by  the  reading  of  pioos  books,  and  particular! j  tbs 
iiolf  scripttiret.  in  editions  approved  by  the  church— joa  precedin;^  them  by  word 
and  eiample.**  "Ut  a  perversomni  libroninn  lectfone.qufbaSfCalaniitc^issiniis  hisof 
temporibnt  sancta  nostra  Relifio  undique  iropctitur,  ab^tineant;  ut  piorum  libra 
fiin,pa:aertiiBtcripfiiranini  sacranini  lectione.  ineditionibus  ab  Ecclesia  nppro 
balls  in  fdc  et  in  bonis  opertbust  Tobii  fcrbo  etexcmplopraeuDtibus,courorteB 
tor.** 

**  In  the  pdini  ofLoalt  XIV.  of  France,  at  the  safgestion  of  Bossnet,  bishop  of 
MeauSfSOJIiil  Mpiei  of  the  new  Testament  in  the  vernacular  tongue,  were  dit 
llibiilid  in  th«  pwrinccs.**    See  Tindiration  of  rtligiou^  Orders,  No.  40,  3  <.  rol. 

The  Index  Is  a  book  of  which  I  have  never  had  a  copy ;  and  no  Ca« 
HiiIMi  tlml  I  know  of,  in  the  United  States,  has  ever  seen  it.  The 
Inw  of  nature  is  as  much  of  an  "Index**  as  that  volume,  for  it  forbids 
«■  to  read  bad  books  which  the  index*finger  of  conscience  points  to 
It  as  evil,  with  the  word—BiWiiai !  The  gentleman  greatly  mis- 
takes  the  Catholic  doctrine,  the  morals  of  Catholics,  the  politics,  ths 
intellects  of  Catholics.  I  trust,  as  he  becomes  more  enlightened,  he 
will  think  better  of  them.  I  am  sure  this  audience,  and  the  public, 
will.  All  see  by  the  crowds  of  Catholics  thronginor,  to  the  very  las* 
•moment,  to  this  debate,  how  free  and  fearless  of  the  investigation  of 
their  faith  they  are,  and  IbeL  They  have  had  the  full  benefit  of  all 
llie  gentleman*8  sophistry  and  extracts;  and  the  effect  is  infinitely 
bettor  for  Catholicism  than  any  sermon  that  I,  or  any  Catholic  bishop 
in  th«  wiiMi,  has  ever  preached  to  them.  They  see  that,  with  all  the 
|«mdeman*s  learning  and  talents,  he  has  utterlv  failed  to  estoblish  a 
•in|fle  one  of  his  propositions.  Hence  they  will  be  more  attached  to 
their  faith  than  ever. 

As  to  the  deposing  power,  I  may  recall  to  your  recollection  the  fact 
that  five  great  universities  of  Europe  were  consulted  by  William  Pitt* 
tnd  thcjr  all,  in  the  most  solemn  language,  reprobated  such  a  doctrine 
Their  decisions  may  appear  in  an  appendix,  if  we  publish  one.  I 
have  not  tint  to  read  them  now.  In  Millner*8  End  of  controversy, 
and  Charles  Butler's  nemoirs  d'Enfflish,  Irish  and  Scottish  Catholica» 
we*ll  find  these  matters  fairly  stated  and  discussed. 

There  is  nnore  liberty  in  Home  than  the  gentleman  gives  it  crodit 
for.  There  is  a  Protestant  chuich,  even  in  Rome,  where  service  is 
regularly  performed  according  to  the  Episcopalian  rite.  Tlie  Jews 
»n  not  any  where  more  charitably  treated,  than  in  the*  eternal  city. 
l.ast  year,  they  presented  a  splendid  copy  of  the  Holy  Bible,  or  soms 
other  sacred  book,  to  the  pope,  as  a  token  of  their  irratitude. 

Tlie  gentlemin  calls  the  system  of  tithes  a  dying  system.    It  hue 


BOM  AN  CATHOLIC    BBLIGION. 


VOO 


Indeed  been  a  dying  system.    It  has  slain  its  thousands,  and  made 
tlie  condition  of  the  living  worse  than  that  of  the  dead. 

Judge  Hall,  of  this  place,  has  treated  the  question  discussed,  more 
learnedly  and  eloquently  than  my  worthy  opponent  or  myself.  I  will 
give  his  remarks  the  place  to  which  they  are  so  well  entitled  for 
candor  and  liberality. 

**  riiis  question  has  iiecoroe  so  important  in  the  United  States,  that  It  it  tinw  to 
b^n  to  inquire  into  its  bearings,  and  to  know  wbetbtr  the  public  are  really  la- 
ter«.i^  in  the  eicitenient  which  has  been  cotten  up  with  unnsaal  iodustfy,  and 
has  been  kept  alive  with  a  pertinacity  that  has  seldom  been  equaled.  For  sera- 
tal  yw»  past  the  relig^ioas  protestant  papers  of  our  country,  with  but  few  e% 
«eptio««,  nave  teemed  with  vimleot  attacks  against  the  Catholics,  and  especially 
with  paragraphs  charg^in^  them  substantially  with  designs  hostile  to  our  free  iu> 
•titutions,  and  with  a  systematic  opposition  to  the  spread  of  all  (rte  inquiry  and 
liberal  knowledge.  These  are  grave  charges,  involving  consequences  of  serioua 
import,  and  such  as  should  not  be  believed  or  disbelieved  upon  mere  rumor,  or 
permitted  to  rvstupon  any  vague  hrpothesis ;  because  they  are  of  a  nature  which 
renders  them  susceptible  of  prooL  The  spirit  of  our  institutions  requires  that 
these  questions  should  be  thus  examined.  We  profess  to  guaranty  to  evertr  in- 
habitant of  our  countrv,  certain  rights,  in  the  enjoyment  of  which  he  shall  not 
be  molested,  except  through  the  lostmmeutality  of  a  process  of  law  which  is 
clearlv  indicated.  Life,  liberty,  property,  reputation,  are  thus  guarded — and 
equally  sacred  is  the  right  secured  to  every  man,  to  *  worship  God  according 
to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience.' 

But  it  is  idle  to  talk  of  these  inestimable  rights,  as  having  any  efficacious  ea 
Utence,  if  the  various  checks  and  sanctions,  thrown  around  them  b)-  our  consti- 
tution and  laws,  may  be  evaded,  and  a  lawless  majority,  with  a  high  hand,  ravish 
them  by  force  from  a  few  individuals  who  may  be  eflfectually  outlawed  by  a  per- 
verted public  opinion,  produced  by  calunmy  and  clamor.  It  is  worse  than  idle. 
It  is  wicked,  to  talk  of  libertv,  while  a  majority,  having  no  other  right  than  that 
of  the  strongest,  persist  in  blasting  the  character  of  unoffending  individuals  by 
calumny,  and  in  oppressing  them  by  direct  violence  upon  their  persons  and 
property,  not  only  without  evidence  of  their  delinquency,  but  against  evidence; 
not  only  without  law,  but  in  violation  of  law— «nd  merely  because  they  belonjf 
to  an  unpopular  denomination. 

Thtt>kvery  fact  that  the  Roman  Catholics  are,  and  can  be  with  impunity,  thus 
trampled  upon,  in  a  country  like  ours,  affords  in  itself  the  most  conclusive 
evidence  ol  the  groundlessness  of  the  fears,  which  are  entertained  by  some 
respecting  them.  Without  the  power  to  protect  themselves,  in  the  enjoyment 
of  the  ordinary  rtghU  of  citizenship,  and  with  a  current  of  prejudice  setting  so 
•trongly  against  them,  that  the^  find  safety  only  in  bending  meekly  to  the  ttorm, 
bow  idle,  how  puerile,  how  disingenuous  is  it,  to  rave  as  tome  have  done,  of  the 
danger  of  Catholic  influence! 

We  repeat  that  this  is  a  question  which  mast  rest  upon  testimony.  The 
American  people  are  too  intelligent,  toojust,  too  magnanimous,  to  suffer  the  tem- 
porary delusion  by  which  so  many  haveoeen  blinded,  to  settle  down  into  a  per- 
manent national  prejudice,  and  to  oppress  one  christian  denomination  at  the 
bidding  of  others  without  some  proot,  or  some  reasonable  argument. 

We  have  not  yet  seen  any  evidence  in  the  various  publications  that  hav« 
reached  us.  of  any  unfairness  on  the  part  of  the  Catholics,  in  the  propagation 
of  their  religious  doctrines.  If  they  are  active,  persevering,  and  ingenious  in 
tuei-  attempts  to  gain  converts,  and  if  they  are  successful  in  securing  the  coun- 
tenance ana  support  of  those  who  maintain  the  same  form  of  belief  In  other 
countries,  these  we  imagine,  are  the  legitimate  proofs  of  christian  zeal  and  sin- 
cerity. In  relation  to  protestant  sects,  they  are  certainly  to  estimated ;  and  we 
■re  vet  to  learn,  why  the  ordinary  laws  of  evidence  are  to  be  set  aside  in  refer- 
ence to  this  denomination,  and  why  the  missionary  spirit  which  is  so  praisewor- 
thy in  others,  should  be  thought  so  wicked  and  so  dangerous  in  them. 

Let  us  imjuire  into  this  matter  calmly.  Why  is  it  that  the  Catholics  are  par- 
■ued  with  such  pertinacity,  with  such  vindicliveness,  with  such  ruthless  malevo- 
lence? Why  cannot  their  peculiar  opinions  be  opposed  by  argument,  by  per- 
■ua«ion,  by  remonstrance,  as  one  christian  sect  should  oppose  each  other?  We 
•peak  kimily  of  the  Jew,  and  even  of  the  heathen;  there  are  thote  that  bvc  a 


'MM 


Jl^llii  or  «  C1ieTOl«e  even  better  than  tbcir  own  twh  mud  bfood ;  bit  •  CatlMlle 
ii  an  abouiinatioa,  Ibr  whom  iber«  is  no  b«r,  bo  olMMritjrt  no  bowl  ni  cbritliia 

Tbwtt  ivflections  riM  Bfttamllj  out  of  the  roceot  prorcoding*  m  MlatNM  l« 
llio  RoaMii  Catholics.  A  oaniiorjr  Int  beea  demolished  by  sn  iofiirmted  mob— 
■  stmli  connnnn^f  of  reined  nnd  unprotected  females,  bwfullj  and  usefullj  en- 
~~~'*  ill  tic  tnilion  of  chitdren»  whose  parents  hare  Tolantarilj  conmitted  thea 
^  hmm  been  driven  from  their  home — yH  the  pcrpelralora  hare  es- 
iment,  and  the  act,  if  not  openljr  excused,  is  wiafced  at,  b^  proleataoC 
Tio«lMnftt  was  public,  extensive,  and  undeniable;  ana  a  nMWt  ra 
mmmMmIi  who  inTei»t|g;ated  all  the  facts,  hare  shown  that  it  was  wn 
mere  wMilon  ebullition  of  sara|;e  nalignity.  Yet  the  symfinthier 
if  a  larfe  portion  of  the  protcstant  community  are  nnUiuched. 

Is  aiiolher  instance  rci|airad.  of  the  pervadioi^  chamrler  of  thi«  prrjadicel 
How  oommon  has  been  the  expedient,  employed  by  niiasiooarieB  from  the  w«sl, 
ill  th«  noilnrn  states,  of  raisinj^  money  for  education  or  for  rt- ligion  upon  the  al» 
iwaiioo  that  it  was  necessary  to  prevent  the  ascendency  of  the  catholics.  How 
wma  has  it  been  asserted,  throughout  the  last  Inn  years,  that  thii  was  the  chosen 
inhi  on  which  the  ppists  had  erected  their  stanclard.  and  where  the  battle  must 
bn  ln|ht  ibr  civil  and  religious  liberty.  What  tales  of  horror  have  bet-n  ponrad 
iato  tin  tars  of  the  confiding  children  of  the  pilgrims— of  yonng  men  emigrat- 
ing to  the  west,  marrying  catholic  ladies,  and  colTaptiiir  without  a  struggle  into 
llwnffnis  offtoMnMnn — ofspiendid  cdificrs  undenuinea  by  profound  dungeons, 
for  iM  MC«ption  of  heretic  republicans— of  boxes  of  firearms  secretly 
>rted  into  hidden  receptacles,  in  the  very  bosoms  of  our  flonrishing  cities 
■  _iji_«_  jjunig^  Luropean  conspiracies  by  which  Irish  catholics  sr# 
I  into  lovers  ofnionarchy,  and  obedient  instruments  ot'  kii^l 
piiicn  so  iadomitable  and  so  blind,  conld  not  fail,  in  an  ingenious  and  eii 
1  iiko  ours,  to  be  made  the  subject  of  pecuniary  speculation ;  accord* 


ingly  we  find  incli  works  as  the  *  Master  Key  to  Popeiy,'  *lS«crela  of  Femala 
Convents,*  nad  *  Six  Months  in  a  Convent,*  manufiuiturad  with  a  distinct  view 
to  iHihIng  a  profit  out  of  this  diseased  state  of  the  public  mind.  The  abuse  of 
the  catholics  therefore  is  not  merely  matter  of  p»rty  rancor,  but,  is  a  regular 
trade,  and  the  compilation  of  anti-catholic  boolw  of  the  character  alluded  to,  has 
become  a  part  of  the  reguhur  indnstrT  of  the  country,  as  much  as  the  making  of 
nutmegs,  or  the  construction  of  clocks. 
Philosophy  saactioiw  the  belief,  that  power  held  by  any  set  of  men  without 
stoaiut  or  compalitioa.  is  liable  to  abuse;  and  history  teaches  the  humiliating 
fiKtthat  piwor  ihns  held  has  always  been  abased.  To  inquire  who  has  been 
'"'  "'  agwessor  against  the  rights  o(  human  nature,  when  all  who  hava 


baas  laiBptBd  have  evinced  a  common  propensity  to  trample  upon  the  laws  of 
juitill  MM  benevolence,  would  be  an  unprofitable  procedure.    The  reformcrt 


heresy  by  death  as  well  as  the  catholics ;  and  the  murders  perpetrated 
.  ialolcronce,  in  the  nwn  of  Eltxabeth,  were  not  leas  atrocious  than  those 
which  occurred  under  *  the  bloody  Mary.'  We  m%ht  even  come  nearer  home, 
and  point  to  colonies  on  onr  own  continent,  planted  by  men  processing  to  havo 
iod  from  relifioas  peffsecntjoa,  who  not  only  excluded  from  all  civil  and  politi* 
cnl  rkhls  those  who  were  separated  from  them  by  only  slight  shades  of  religi- 
ons beliei;  but  persacatcd  many  even  to  death,  for  heresy  and  witchcraft.  Yet 
Ihesa  things  «ro  not  taken  into  the  calculation,  and  the  catholics  are  assumed, 
withoat  •aamiaaiion,  to  be  exclusively  and  especially  prone  to  the  sins  of  op- 
primiijii  nd  craclty. 


Ho  BNneh  catholics,  at  a  wtrj  earlr  period,  commenced  a  system  of  ainioai 
■mt  iha  eoaversioa  of  Ibo  Indians,  aao  were  reowrkablr  socceisful  in  gainiof 
coavavis,  aad  conciliating  the  confidence  and  affections  of  the  tribes.  While  tha 
BM|aods  aad  olhar  northern  tribes  wera  becoming  exterminated,  or  sold  iotc 
alavtfj,  the  Biofftt  fiortunate  savage  of  the  Mississippi  was  listening  to  the  pioot 
*i._i:       :_-:  m^-..  t^  another  fiict,  vrhich  deserves  to  b 

in  the  examination  of  the  testimoni 
.  . ,  f  Ity  if  not  quite  so  keen  as  is  usaall 

|§iand,  and  that  the|  exercised,  of  choice,  an  expansive  beaet oleoce,  at  a  p«n> 
wt  illiaa  palastants,  similarly  situated,  were  blo<xl-tbirsty  and  rapacioas. 
Advancing:  a  tittle  furtharin  pfiiut  of  time,  we  find  a  number  of  colonies  ad- 
;  rapidly  towards  |mia|iatitT.  oa  oar  Allaatic  aea  board,    'a  ifoial  uf  civil 


counsels  of  the  catholic  missionary.— This  is  another  fiict.  which  deserves  to  br 
remembered,  and  which  ahoald  be  weighed  in  tlie  examination  of  the  testimony 
It  afaaws  that  the  catholic  appetite  for  cruelty  ir  not  quite  so  keen  as  is  usaaln 


BOMAN   CATHOLIC    SBU  IIOK. 


357 


Eirerament  Ihey  were  somevrhat  detached,  each  making  Its  own  municipal 
ws,  and  there  being  in  each  a  predoniinance  of  the  influence  (»f  one  rt:ltnoos 
ienomination.  We  might  therefore  expect  to  see  the  political  bias  of  each  sect 
parried  oat  into  practice,  and  it  is  curious  to  examine  how  6ir  such  was  the  fact. 
It  IS  the  more  curious,  because  the  writers  and  orators  of  one  branch  of  this 
iMiiily  of  republics,  are  io  the  habit  of  attributing  to  their  own  fathers,  the  prin- 
ciples o»  religious  and  political  toleration,  which  became  established  throughout 
the  whole,  and  are  now  the  boast  and  pride  of  our  nation.  The  intpartial  record 
of  htstor>-  aA'ords  on  this  subject  a  proof  alike  honorable  to  all,  but  which  re- 


and  South  Carolina  by  a  mingled  population  of  roundheads  and  cavaliers  fror 
LiM^and,  and  of  French  hu<^eootit — ^yet  the  same  broad  foundations  of  civil  and 
political  liberty  were  laid  simultaneously  in  them  all,  and  llie  same  spirit  of  re- 
sistance animated  each  communitr,  when  the  oppressions  of  the  mother  (.ountry 
became  intolerable.  Religious  intolerance  prevailed  In  early  times  only  in  the 
eastern  coloniei>,but  the  witchcraft  superstition,  though  most  strongly  developed 
there,  pervaded  some  other  portions  oHhe  new  settlements.  We  shall  not  ampli- 
fy our  remarks  on  this  topic;  it  is  enough  to  say,  that  if  the  love  of  monarcbj 
was  a  component  principle  of  the  catholic  faith,  it  was  not  develop<Ml  in  our 
country  when  a  fair  opportunity  was  oflered  for  its  exercise;  and  that  in  the  glo- 
rious strugi^le  for  libertv,  for  civil  and  religious  emancipation — when  oorfiithers 
arrayed  themselves  in  defence  of  the  sacred  principles  involving  the  whole  broad 
ground  of  contest  between  liberty  and  despotism,  the  catholic  and  the  protectant 
stood  side  by  side  on  the  battle  field,  and  in  the  council,  and  pledged  to  their 
common  countrr,  with  equal  devotedness,  their  lives,  their  fortunes,  and  theirsa- 
cred  honor.  Nor  shouldfit  be  forgoilen,  that  in  a  conHut  thus  peculiarly  mark- 
ed, a  catholic  king  was  our  ally,  when  the  most  powerful  of  protestant  govern- 
ments was  our  enemy.** 

Now,  my  friends  and  fellow  citizens,  let  me  hare  pennission  to 
close  this  debate  by  the  lan^age  of  the  illustrious  Washington, 
In  his' answer  to  the  patriotic  address  of  the  U.  S.  Catholics,  f  dis- 
claim all  unkind  feeling  towards  Mr.  Campbell  or  any  of  his  friends, 
and  acknowledore  my  ^titude  to  him  for  enabling  me  to  place  my 
relinrion,  in  its  proper  h^ht,  before  the  public.  I  also  beg  leave  res- 
pectfully to  tender  to  this  audience  my  thanks  for  the  dignity  of  their 
tieportment  during  this  debate.  Instead  of  quarreling  about  religion 
we  ought  to  be  engaged  in  our  vocation  of  love  and  peace,  as  its 
faithful  ministers,  and  sincere  professors.  We  have  all,  a  great  deal 
to  do  to  improve  the  morals  of  the  age,  to  elevate  the  standard  of 
literature,  to  promote  by  such  means  as  all  christians  approve,  the 
welfare  of  our  common  country,  and  to  obtain  for  our  green  state,  the  fer- 
tile and  flourishing,  Ohio,  a  distinguished  rank  for  knowledge,  virtue 
ani  patriotism,  among  her  elder  and  her  younger  sisters  in  this  fair 
repufiHc.  These  are  legitimate  pursuits,  alike  pleasing  to  God,  and 
useful  to  man.  The  world  is  large  enough  for  us  all.  Some  can,  in 
the  Abraham  and  Lot  way  of  settling  their  diiEculties,  feed  their 
flocks  in  one  field,  and  some  in  another ;  and,  as  Joseph  said  to  his 
brethren  going  home  to  their  father,  from  Egypt,  as  we  are  going  to 
©ne  heavenly  Father,  "  see  that  ye  fell  not  out  by  the  wajf  •'  (Reads 
fiom  Washington's  letter  as  follows :) 

To  IHE  Roman  Catholics  in  the  United  States  of  America. 

Gentlemen — While  I  now  receive  with  much  satisfaction  your  congratulatf  jna 
on  my  being  called  by  an  unanimous  vote,  to  the  first  station  in  my  ccuitr)-,  I 
cannot  but  duly  notice  your  politeness,  in  oflfering  an  apology  for  the  unav«>idable 
il.»lt»y.     As  thiit  delay  has  given  you  an  opportunity  of  realizing,  instead  of  antici- 

E sting,  the  benefits  of  the  general  government,  you  will  do  me  the  justice  to  be- 
cve,  that  your  testimony  of  the  increaae  of  the  public  prosperity,  enhances  tb« 


OR 


liliidi  I  ilioiild  othtniiM  have  expcricwMl  inoni  jonr  aieclioiiaia  sA 


J  iM  thai  mj  enmiiMil,  in  irar  uid  in  pence,  hat  met  with  more  general  mpfm 
lalMiii  IbancovM  haw  ivntoaably  bmm  expected;  aad  I  lintJ  npelf  diapoard  It 
•iMlidar  lliat  fovtnnalc  circunittancc*  in  a  great  depee,  reaurtiai^  from  the  ablb 
annporl,  mkI  eatiMNlinary  candor,  of  my  felbw-citisena  of  all  deoominatiooa. 
TIm  pmtpect  of  national  protperitjr  now  baibre  oa.  if  trulj  animating,  and 
It  to  excite  the  exertions  of  all  goiwl  men,  to  attabliah  and  wcara  the  bappi* 
of  their  coantry,  in  th«  permanent  duration  of  iU  freedom  and  indeptsa* 

m.     America^  under  the  Mniles  oi  diriae  providence,   the   protection  of 

•  good  goTemment,  and  tfaa  cultivation  of  mannen,  morals,  and  piety,  cannot 
§m  of  attaining  an  nncommon  degree  of  amtncnca  in  litemtnrt,  connuerce,  agri* 
cidture,  improvements  at  home,  and  i-eapectability  abroad. 

ila  aMMa  nd  bacnnit  more  libanl,tbaV  will  bamore  apt  to  allow,  that  ntt  fAntt 
«■!•  caiwinci  llmmtdwa  ma  woHk§ww9mr§«fth9  eommmnty,  mtt  ifunUy  €wHiUi 
lb  iJI«  jwaiMioii  ^  cml  fovemmenl.  1  hope  ever  to  see  America  among  tha 
ibffeiiMMt  nations  in  examples  of Jnslice  and  tiberalitv.  And  1  presuma  that  y  onr 
"  'nana  trolt  naljbifal  im  pminoik  fmH  wUek  jfon  took  im  tht  memm' 
if Haif  'rgtalniiaii,  and  lAa  §»kiMuhment  tfthtir  ftwemmeii/,  or  tnn 
I.  "niiiiiiniiiiTu  which  they  raceivad  from  a  nation  in  which  tha  Roman 
'imii  n  proieasea.  •  *        • 

I  Ibanl  yon,  gentlemen,  for  yonr  kinfl  concern  for  ma.    While  my  life  and 
my  health  shall  continue,  in  whatever  situation  I  may  be,  it  shall  be  my  con- 
'     '       J lo  justify   the  favorable  lentinients  which  yon  are  pleased  to 


of  nw  cnndnct.  And  may  the  nienibers  of  yonr  society  in  America,  ani- 
Mted  alone  by  the  pure  spirit  of  Christianity,  and  still  conducting  themselves  as 
tha  ttthlul  subjects  of  our  govemmant,  anjoy  avary  temporal  and  spiritual  felicity 

GEORGE  WASHINGTON. 

Maicli,  17911b 

[mo  or  THE   DEIATI.] 


The  foilowing  are  the  extracts  referred  to  on  page  324  :— 

ElfOUSH  DiVIPECS. 


Brtv,  2S9,)  ft  jMst  like  the  immjfititmtwn  eftki  diacaaat  qfour  frady  fo  f^  f *ff- 
•ctan/or  God  hmth  appmnted  tkem^m  Mpirmti ^lymeium,'*  (Thyhr,  ut  fupma.) 
F.  S.  It  hmatmrtUd  many  mtJbiMfl  mdtpmdmi^whoinf  thtmica  km*  got  hold 
^mmm%inaltifork^gtmdyJofmCmlm9ttmr  Motim  ijutkor^whmim  «ome  veU- 
mrhid  **  eommentarut"  some  latent  pmmmgt  qf  •*  Tie  liiflllwlions,**  kokmitm' 
cotMlcrsd  fly  adinttttont,  weU  gtmrded  *y  enufiouf  'f^,*  mid  lef^  to  their  own 
jdfif  wtfliml  d^lMce  or  opohgj,  yot  mmmm  mmk  |f  nncienl  koren.  ^nm 
In  fft«  Aontffy  af  Att  ^iMinanet,  k§  hm  itdaimid,  em  he  rtimmod  iht  dmtif 
NHnliimn  toitMmom^^Oromi  CeMm!  wmek  kmming  heOh  made  thee  vmd.  The  6«- 
bk^  mmd  the  Mk&eihne,  is  thereMgiom^Frotestmmts,  Wh€re  hmo  frera  Protes* 
fnnlt  M  mmaiBtmi  m»  the  Comtmmiw  mmd  m  PmHtmiuf  Agoigmimg  to  Roma 
fft<«ioft  tady'^«ftf#iian  fsafimatty,  ^ii^fflefM;*,  and  wiadom;  mitmreading, 
m  one  Hawl,  the  hromd  Immur  of  prtvmte  opinion;  coolly  ha$iginffamd  kuming 
ihfirhrmther-demoemte  wUh  the  oth§ri  estolUng  Pruteslantiam  u»  tht  reUgtMrn 

of  ma  amiiarhteM€diMrhfpro9imgiiikar*Htrion  ^  the  ignormnt And  whomra 

Say  ihmi  tha  Mgmm  "  m  %©!"  poimla  mi,  -  Rmmmiatar  "  Fi^iakerar  "  mama 
mtghhora  §a^  Hi  ,Jlnlyi0ii  af  niljiitnaltimsr*  They  mrt  mm  ioA«  hma  dtvmiti 
libtr  iioct  m  Ut  afii^  of  Iha  iapinnfs  muthorUiea  of^oeirim  mmd  rite.'* 


ROMAlf   CATHOLIC   SSUOION. 


3.10 


This  was  exhibited  and  the  mniea  read  at  the  eloee  of  debate  «■ 
■INMtolic  succession. 

Tabular  view  of  the  order  of  the  Episcopal  succession  fn  the  prominent  vft^- 
tile)  Dioceses  mentioned  by  Eusebius. 

Bishops  or  Robie. 

Peter  and  Fkul,  according  to  Eusebius,  died  as  martyrs  at  Rome;  after  ihean 
followed, 

1  Linns.  9  Pius,  16  ITrbanus,  33Xrstii8orSiilntU 

2  Aiieticletns,        10  Anicetus,  17  Ponttanus,  94  Dionysius, 

5  Clement.  11  Soter,  18  Anteros,  25  Felii, 

4  Enarestns,  12  Eleuthems,        19  Fabianns.  26  Eutvchianui, 

i  Alexander,         13  Victor,  fO  Cornelius.  27  Cams, 

6  XystusorSixtus.H  Zephyrinus,        21  Lucius,  28  Marcellinua, 

7  Telesphorns,      15  Callisthus,  22  Stcpfaaiius,         29  Miltiades. 

8  Hyginus, 

Bishops  of  Antioch. 

1  Evodius,  6  Theophilus,        11  Zebinas,     .        16  Domnns, 

2  Lniatins,  7  Maximinus,        12  Baby  las,  17  TimoRus, 

3  ileron,  8  Serapion,  13  Fabtus,  18  Cyritlus, 

4  Comeliuit  9  Asclepiades,       14  Deinetrianus.      19  Ij'rannus, 
6  Eros,                   10  Pbiletus,  15  Paul  of  Saniosata. 

Bishops  or  Alexandria. 
Tha  evangelist  Mark,  established  the  church  there,  and  after  him  came, 

1  Annianus,  6  Eumenei,  11  Demetrius,  16  Peter, 

2  Avilius,  7  Marcus,  12  Heracia?,  17  Achillas, 

3  Cerdo,  8  Celadion,  13  Dionysius,  18  Alexander, 

4  Primus,  9  Agnppinus,        14  Maximus, 

5  Justus,  10  Julianns,  15  Theonas, 

Bishops  or  Laodicea. 
Thelymedres,        Socrates,  Anatolius,  Theodotui, 

Hatiodoms,  Eusebius  of  Alexandria,  Stephen, 

Bishops  or  Cesarea. 
Theophilus  Domnus,  Agapius,  Eusebius. 

Thcoctistus,  Theotecous, 

Having  revisftd  some  three  hundred  pares  ot  proof  ut  this  debate,  before  1 
left  Cincinnati  for  New  Orleans,  on  the  2nd  of  March,  1837,  I  am  willing  to 
consider  and  approve  the  report,  as  beiug  substantially  correct.  I  have  the  ut* 
must  confidence  in  the  honor  and  honesty  of  the  publishers,  Messrs.  J.  A.  James 
ft  Co.,  that  the  balance  of  the  discussion  will  be  feirly  presented  to  tiie  public. 

t  JOHN  B.  PURCELL,  Bishop  of  Cincinnati. 


THE  DISPUTED  PASSAGE  OF  ST.  LIGORL— MR.  CAMPBELL'S 
DOCUMENTARY  SUBSTANTIATION. 

Tka  rroder,  who  looks  back  to  pages  219.253,  will  there  see  with  what  solemn 
•nd  strong  assaveratious  the  Bishop  declared  that  no  such  passage  as  that  quoted 
from  page  294  was  ever  written  by  Saint  Ligori.* 

AIr.  Smith,  in  reply  to  my  letter  per  Mr.  Emmons,  wrote  as  follows — 

*'  The  obnoxious  passage,  then,  whicb  the  Romish  Bishop  of  Cincinnati  calls  hen- 
Xtii  and  earth  to  witness  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  works  orligori,  is  the  following^ 

**  A  Bishop,  however  poor  he  may  be,  cannot  appropriate  to  himself  pecuniaiy 
Unas,  withcnt  the  licence  of  the  Apostolical  See.  But  he  ought  to  apply  them 
to  pious  uses.  Much  less  can  he  apply  those  fines  to  any  thing  else  but  pioua 
nses,  which  tha  Council  of  TVemt  has  laid  upon  non- resident  Clergymen,  or 
upon  those  CUrrymen  who  keep  Co»ev6tnet.**— Ligor.  Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444. 

This  passage,  I  will  now  give  in  the  Latin,  as  it  stands  on  the  444th  page  of 
the  8th  volume  of  the  **  Moral  THEOLoGir  or  Alphoksus  de  Ligorio,"  ^m 
whose  Work  the  extract  was  mada.    The  words  are  as  follows: 

**Mulctas  pecuniarias  Episcopus  sibi  addicara  non  potest,  quantumvls  paupar 

*  See  psfes  900,  310,  330. 


'iniATl  &c. 

•It,  fine  licentia  Sedis  Apottolics.  [itt  ei  plnribni  amimcntit  S.  Cong^regat 
OTincitiir  in  Tract.  De  Srn*  Dicec.  L.  10.  C.  10.  N.  2.1  Sed  dcsbeut  in  asaa  piot 
eipeiKii.  Multo  maris  non  poaraiit  nisi  in  piot  nras  applicari  ill«e  mulctae,  qaai 
Truleiitinani  inflixit  Clericis  non  reudentiDiis,  aot  coocubioariia.**— Ligor.  Epit. 
Doc.  Mor.  D.  444. 

The  woras  included  in  the  brackets,  were  not  translatedt  nerdjr  baemise  I 
did  not  with  to  encuniber  the  *■  Synopsis,"  fat  I  have  obtenred  in  tb«  *«  Puc- 
FACE  or  THE  SiTifoPflis,")  frith  too  many  of  the  authoritiet  quoted  bj  Ligori. 
I  thall  now,  however,  translate  the  above  wordt  in  the  brackets,  much,  I  know, 
to  the  diicomfiture  of  hit  Reverence  the  Romish  Btthop  of  Cincinnati.  The 
woidt  in  the  brackets,  therefore,  translated,  are  at  foUowt  ■  [**at  is  evident  from 
many  argumentt  of  the  Holy  Conrrmtion,  in  tba  Treatise  respecting  the  Dio* 
ccsan  Synods,  Book  10,  Chapter  10,  Kumber  2."] 

Here  we  have,  not  oniv  the  authority  of  SL  Ligori,  bat  alto  that  of  Htm 
•'  Maly  Congrermtum  of  Rite*.** 

Since  this  tubject  Is  now  to  be  probed  to  the  bottom,  we  will  also  translate 
the  contracted  wordt  which  I  trantferred  Into  the  •*  Synopsis"  as  I  found  them 
in  the  original.  The  wordt  to  which  I  allude  are  the  terminating  onet  of  the 
disputed  pattage,  as  foliowa:~**Ligor.  Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444.**— which,  trant- 
lated,  stand  thus:— "From  the  Work  of  Ligori,  under  the  head  of 'An  Epitom* 
of  the  Moral  Doctrine,'  page  444." 

In  order  to  render  the  testimony  still  more  ttrikinr,  it  is  important  to  cbservt 
that  this  **  Epitome  of  the  Moral  Doctrine,"  to  whicB  Ligori  alludes,  is  an  Epi 
tome  compiled  by  no  less  a  personage  than  Pope  Benedict  XIV.  as  we  are  in* 
formed  by  Ligori  himself,  in  the  301tt  page  of  the  8th  volume  of  hit  **MomAI 

That  the  prevtona  Latin  words  are  truly  and  faithfully  the  wordt  of  St.  Ligori 
and  fairly  extracted  from  8th  voluiue,  p.  444.  is  duly  certified  by  the  following 
learned  gentlemen. 

We,  the  undertigned,  have  carefiilly  examined  the  foregoing  extracts  from 
the  Moral  Theology  of  St.  Ligori;  and  having  compared  them  with  the  original 
Latin  copy  of  that  Work,  now  before  us,  we  do  hereby  certify  that  the  suid 
extracts  are  verimlim^  trnly  and  correctly  given  by  Mr.  Smith. 

In  this  certificate,  we  include,  particularly,  the  passage  disputed  by  Bishop 
Purcell,  which  is  contained  in  Mr.  Smith's  "Synopsis,"  p.  294,  par.  7,  headed 

••  CONCUAINES  of  the  Ci.ERGr." 

IWNCAN  DUNBAR,  Pasttr  (^  Iks  MDomgrnlH.  Bapt.  Chnrek, 
jnO.  KEIVNADAY,  Pmster  gj  tks  MMktHat  Ejti»cop9l  Church. 
SPENCER  H.  GONE,  Pmt^r^tMs  fmntr-strtet  Baptist  Chunk. 
SAITL  F.  B.  MORSE.  Pr^.  ik.i»  thsUmiversitfqfthe  Citf  ^  Jfem  YorL 
WM.  GREEN.  Jr.  Dmeon  in  tkM  M*  JVm  Ctvg.  Church,  Jf.  T. 
C.  6.  FINNEY.  Pastor  ^  Ot  Okmrthim  ths  Broadmay  nberuasls. 
lew  York,  VmVj  33,  ]»37. 

On  receiving  the  above  communication  from  Mr.  Smith  I  asked  from  bishop 
Furcell  the  loan  of  the  works  of  St.  Ligori.  He  politely  complied  with  my  re- 
quest Turning  to  the  page,  444,  volume  8,  I  found  every  word  in  hit  own 
edition  as  above  reported.  I  carried  it  and  the  Synopsis  of  Mr.  Smith  to  our 
mutual  friend  Mr.  Kinmont,  to  whom  it  was  now  my  time  to  appeal.  Mr.  Kin- 
mont  read  both  the  original  and  the  trantlatirm:  and  then  certified  at  followt. 

The  above  (version  of  Smith  p.  294)  I  r^rd  to  be  m/aithfui  traotlation  of 
the  pasaage  at  it  stands  in  the  8tb  volume  ofLigori  page  444. 

Cincinnati,  Feb*y  3, 1837.  AlbxaMDER  KntMollT. 

Having  rwd  all  the  proofs  of  thit  ditcastion,  I  certify,  that  the  reader  h?t 
•ubstantially,  as  correctly,  at  under  all  the  circumttaocet  could  have  been  i;x 
pected,  a  fair  repretentalon  of  the  whole  diacniiioa. 

March  7. 1837.  a.  CAMPBELL. 


TUB  mil 


BIBLIOGRAPHIC  IRREGULARITIES 


MAIN 


Bibliographic  Irregularities  in  the  Original  Document 
List  volumes  and  pages  affected;  include  name  of  institution  if  filming  borrowed  text. 

Page(s)  missing/not  available: 


yolumes(s)  missing/not  available: 


Jl^Illegible  and/or  damaged  page(s):    3*1  ^^P 


.Page(s)  or  volumes(s)  misnumbered: 


_Bound  out  of  sequence:. 


.Page(s)  or  illustration(s)  filmed  from  copy  borrowed  from:  Sa^  Copjj 


Other: 


BEST  COPY 


THE 


BATTLE  OF  THE  GIANTS: 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE, 


BY  THE 


RIGHT  HON.  W.  E.  GLADSTONE.  E  P. 


WITH  THE 

REPLIES    OF    DR.    NEWMAN,   ARCHBISHOP   MANNING, 

THE  RIGHT  REV.  MONSIGNOR  CAPEL,  LORD 

ACTON,  AND   LORD   CAMOYS, 

AND  A  FULL  ABSTRACT    OP 

GLADSTOISTE'S  EEJOHSTDER. 


t 


CINCINNATI :  C.  F.  VENT. 

CHICAGO:    J.S.   GOODMAN    &    CO. 

1875. 


la 


Am 


Kntered  according  to  Act  of  CoDgress,  in  the  year  1875, 
^     In  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington,  D.  O. 


--^, 


0 


'(^ 


aTBBKOTVPID  *T  K^^T^ 

Fbanxlin  Typb  Fuumdbv,       ^l^d^"* 


. 


THE 


VATICAN  DECREES 


IN   THEIR  BEARING  ON 


CIVIL    ALLEGIANCE: 


BY  THE 


BIGIIT  HON.  W.  E.  GIAOSTONE,  I.  P. 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


IN   THEIR   BKAKING   ON 


CIYIL  ALLEGIAK"OE. 


I,  The  Occasion  and  Scope  of  this  Tract. 

In  the  prosecution  of  a  purpose  not  polemical  but  pacific,  I 
have  been  led  to  employ  words  which  belong,  more  or  less,  to  the 
region  of  religious  controversy ;  r.nd  which,  though  they  were 
themselves  fe#,  seem  to  require,  from  the  various  feelings  they 
have  aroused,  that  I  should  carefully  define,  elucidate,  and  defend 
them.     The  task  is  not  of  a  kind  agreeable  to  me;  but  I  proceed 

i/\  nftrf«>rin  it 

Among  the  causes  which  have  tended  to  disturb  and  Perplex  the 
public  mind  in  the  consideration  of  our  own  religious  di2]cujtjcs, 
one  has  been  a  certain  alarm  at  the  aggressive  activity  and  imag- 
ined growth  of  the  Roman  Church  in  this  country  A  1  are  aAvare 
of  out  susceptibility  on  this  side ;  and  it  was  not,  f  think,  improper 
for  one  who  desires  to  remove  every  thing  that  can  interfere  with 
a  calm  and  judicial  temper,  and  who  believes  the  alarm  to  be 
groundless,  to  state,  pointedly  though  briefly,  some  reasons  for 

***  Accordingly,  I  did  not  scruple  to  use  the  following  language,  in 
a  paper  inserted  in  the  number  of  the  *  Contemporary  Eeview 
for  the  month  of  October.     1   was  speaking  of     the  question 
whether  a  handful  of  the  clergy  are  or  are  not  engaged  m  an 
utterly  hopeless  and  visionary  effort  to  Romanize  the  Church  and 

^*^"it  no  time  shice  the  bloody  reign  of  Mary  has  such  a  scheme 
been  possible.  But  if  it  had  been  possible  in  the  seventeenth  or 
eighteenth  centuries,  it  would  still  have  become  impossible  m  the 
nineteenth:  when  Rome  has  substituted  for  the  proud  boast  of 
semper  eadem  a  policy  of  violence  and  change  m  faith ;  when  she 
has  refurbished,  and  paraded  anew,  every  rusty  tool  she  was 
fondly  thought  to  have  disused ;  when  no  one  can  become  her  con- 
vert without  renouncing  his  moral  and  mental  freedom,  and  plac- 
ing  his  civil  loyalty  and  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another;  and  when 
8he  has  equally  repudiated  modern  thought  and  ancient  history. 
Had  I  been,  when  I  wrote  this  passage,  as  I  now  am,  address- 


•  *  Contemporary  Review,'  Oct.,  1874,  p.  674. 


(5) 


t'Sl 


¥1IJS    f  AXlliAJl    MSLllKISSf 

img  myself  in  considerable  raeasor©  to  my  Koman  Catholic  fellow 
wmntrymen,  I  should  have  striven  to  avoid  the  seeming  roiigh- 
neiis  of  some  of  these  expressions ;  bat  as  the  question  is  now 
ftboiit  their  substance,  from  which  I  am  not  In  any  particular  dis- 
fOtod  to  recede,  any  attempt  to  recast  their  general  form  would 
pnlMibly  mislead.  I  proceed,  then,  to  deal  with  them  on  their 
ateri'ts. 

More  than  one  friend  of  mine,  among  those  who  have  been  led 
to  join  the  Boman  Catholic  communion,  has  made  this  passage  the 
subject,  more  or  less,  of  expostulation.  Now,  in  my  opinion,  the 
Assertions  which  it  makes  are,  as  coming  from  a  layman  who  has 
sponl  most  and  the  best  years  of  his  life  in  the  observation  and 
fffMSliM  of  politios,  not  affiressive,  but  defensive. 
'^  It  is  neitlcir  the  abettai  of  the  Papal  Chair,  nor  any  one  who, 
Iiowever  far  from  bein|5  an  abettor  of  the  Papal  Chair,  actually 
writes  from  a  Papal  point  of  view,  that  has  a  right  to  remonstrate 
with  the  world  at  large ;  but  it  is  the  world  at  Targe,  on  the  con- 
trary, that  has  the  fullest  right  to  remonstrate,  first  with  His  Holi- 
ness secondly  with  those  who  share  his  proceedings,  thirdly  even 
with  sneh  ae  passively  allow  and  accept  them. 

I  therefore,  as  one  of  the  world  at  large,  propose  to  expostulate 
in  my  tarn.  I  shall  strive  to  show  to  such  of  my  Roman  Catholic 
fellow-subjects  as  may  kindly  ^ive  me  a  hearing  that,  after  the 
ii^giiliir  steps  which  the  authorities  of  their  Church  have  in  these 
ksl  years  thoii|;ht  fit  to  take,  the  people  of  this  country,  who  fully 
Wieve  in  their  loyalty,  are  entitled,  on  purely  civil  grounds,  to 
«zpect  from  them  some  declaration  or  manifestation  of  opinioa,  in 
reply  to  that  ecclesiastical  party  in  their  Church  who  have  laid 
down,  in  their  name,  principles  adverse  to  the  purity  and  integrity 
nf  civil  allegiiinee. 

Undoubtedly  my  allegations  are  of  great  breadth.  Such  broad 
■ie^itions   require  a  broad  and  a  deep  foundation.     The    first 

Sieslton  which  they  raise  is.  Are  thejr,  as  to  tlie  material  part  of 
em,  true  ?  But  even  their  truth  might  not  suffice  to  show  that 
their  publication  was  opportune.  The  second  question,  then, 
which  they_ raise  is,  Are  they,  for  any  practical  purpose,  material? 
And  there  is  yet  a  third,  though  a  minor,  question,  which  arises 
out  of  the  propositions  in  connection  with  their  authorship, 
Were  they  suitable  to  be  set  forth  by  the  present  writer? 

T6  these  three  questions  I  will  now  set  myself  to  reply.  And 
the  matter  of  my  reply  will,  as  I  conceive,  constitute  and  convey 
SB  iip>sal  to  the  unaerstandings  of  my  Roman  Catholic  fellow- 
fMttliymen,  which  I  trust  that,  at  the  least,  some  among  them 
say  detm  not  altogether  unworthy  of  their  consideration. 

From  the  language  used  by  some  of  the  organs  of  Roman 
Cktholic  opinion,  it  is.  I  am  afraid,  plain  that  in  some  quarters 
they  have  given  deep  offense.  Displeasure,  indignation,  even  fury, 
night  be  said  to  mark  the  language  which  in  the  heat  of  the  mo- 
miiit  has  been  expressed  here  and  there.  They  have  been 
lustily  treated  as  an  attack  made  upon  Roman  Catholics  gener- 
•If,  niy,  as  an  insult  offered  them.  It  is  obvious  to  reply,  that 
df  Brnniin  Catholics  generally  they  state  nothing.    Together  with 


I 


IK  THEIR  BEAEINO  ON  CIVIL*  ALLEGUXCB.  7 

a  reference  to  "  converts,"  of  which  I  shall  say  more,  they  consti- 
tute generally  a  free  and  strong  animadversion  on  the  conduct  of 
the  Papal  Chair,  and  of  its  advisers  and  abettors.  If  I  am  told 
that  he  who  animadverts  upon  these  assails  thereby,  or  insults, 
Boman  Catholics  at  large,  who  do  not  choose  their  ecclesiastical 
rulers,  and  are  not  recognized  as  having  any  voice  in  the  gov- 
ernment of  their  Church,  1  can  not  be  bound  by  or  accept  a  prop- 
osition which  seems  to  me  to  be  so  little  in  accordance  witn 
reason. 

Before  all  things,  however,  I  should  desire  it  to  be  understood 
that,  in  the  remarks  now  offered,  I  desire  to  eschew  not  only  re- 
ligious bigotry,  but  likewise   theological   controversy.     Indeed, 
with  theology,  except  in  its  civil  hearing,  with  theology  as  such, 
I  have  here  nothing  whatever  to  do.     But  it  is  the  peculiarity  of 
Roman  theology  that,  by  thrusting  itself  into  the  temporal  domain, 
it  naturally,  and  even  necessarily,  comes  to  be  a  frequent  theme 
of  political  discussion.      To  quiet-minded  Roman    Catholics,  it 
must  be  a  subject  of  infinite  annoyance,  that  their  religion  is,  on 
this  ground    more    than   any   other,   the    subject  of  criticism; 
more  than  any  other,  the  occasion   of  conflicts  with  the  State 
and  of  civil  disquietude.      I  feel  sincerely  how  much   hardship 
their    case  entails.      But  this   hardship  is  brought    upon  them 
altogether    by   the   conduct   of    the    authorities   of    their    own 
Church.     Why  did  theology  enter  so  largely  into  the  debates  of 
Parliament  on  Roman  Catholic  Emancipation  ?    Certainly  not  be- 
cause our  statesmen  and  debaters  of  fifty  years  ago  had  an  aV 
stract  love  of  such  controversies,  but  because  it  was  extensively 
believed  that  the  Pope  of  Rome  had  been  and  was  a  trespasser 
upon  ground  which  belonged  to  the  civil  authority,  and  that  he 
affected  to  determine  by  spiritual   prerogative  questions  of  the 
civil  sphere.     This  fact,  if  fact  it  be,  and  not  the  truth  or  false- 
hood, the  reasonableness  or  unreasonableness,  of  any  article  of 
purely  religious  belief,  is  the  whole  and  sole  cause  of  the  mis- 
chief    To  this  fact,  and  to  this  f  ict  alone,  my  language  is  refer- 
able :  but  for  this  fact,  it  would  have  been  neither  my  duty  nor 
my  desire  to  use  it     AH  other  Cliristian  bodies  are  content  with 
freedom   in  their  own  religious  domain.     Orientals,  Lutherans, 
Calvinists,  Presbyterians,  Episcopalians,  Nonconformists,  one  and 
all,  in  the  present  day,  contentedly  and  thankfully  accept  the 
benefits  of  civil  order;  never  pretend  that  the  State  is  not  its  own 
master;  make  no  religious  claims  to  temporal  possessions  or  ad- 
vantages; and,  consequently,  never  are  in  perilous  collision  with 
the  State.     Nay,  more,  even  so  I  believe  it  is  with  the  mass  bf 
Boman  Catholics  individually.     But  not  so  with  the  leaders  of 
their  Church,  or  with  those  who  take  pride   in  following  the 
leaders.     Indeed,  this  has  been  made  matter  of  boast: — 

"There  is  not  another  Church  so  called"  (than  the  Roman), 
"nor  any  community  professing  to  be  a  Church,  which  does  not 
submit,  or  obey,  or  hold  its  peace,  when  the  civil  governors  of 
the  world  command."—'  The  Present  Crisis  of  the  Holy  See,'  by 
H.  B.  Manning,  D.  D.    London,  1861,  p.  75. 

The  Rome  of  the  Middle  Ages  claimed  universal  monarchy. 


1  f  HB  WATWASI  DlCBm 

Tlie  modem  Oiurcli  of  Komo  hti  abandoned  nothing,  retracted 
nothing.  Is  that  all?  Far  from  it.  By  condemning  (as  will  be 
■e«ii)  mom  who,  like  Bishop  Dojle  in  1825,*  charge  Ibe  medi- 
■ml  Popes  with  aggression,  she  unconditionally,  even  if  covertly, 
iMiiiitiiins  what  the  mediaeval  Popes  maintained.  Bnt  even  tills 
la  Eot  the  worst  The  worst  hj  tar  is  that  whereas,  in  the  na- 
tioniil  Charches  and  communities  of  the  Middle  Ages,  there  was 
«  brisk,  vigorous,  and  constant  opjiosition  to  these  outrageous 
elfiim%  an  opposition  which  stoutly  asserted  its  own  orthodoxy, 
wiiub  mlways  eauscd  itself  to  be  respected,  and  which  even  some- 
iiintt  gained  the  upper  hand ;  mow,  in  this  nineteenth  century  of 
ODES,  and  while  it  is  growin«;  old,  this  same  opposftion  has  been 
put  out  of  court,  and  judicially  extinguished  within  the  Papal 
Chareb,  by  the  recent  decrees  of  the  Vatican.  And  it  is  im- 
fOiiibk  for  ptnons  accepting  tho«c  decrees  justly  to  complain, 
whtii  iuch  documents  are  subjected  in  good  faith  to  a  strict  ex- 
saiitiation  as  respects  their  compatibility  with  civil  right  and 
the  obedience  of  subiects. 

In  defending  my  language,  I  shall  carefully  mark  its  limits. 
But  all  defense  is  re-assertion,  which  properly  requires  a  deliber- 
ato  nconsiieration ;  and  no  man  who  thuM  reconsiders  should 
Mmille,  if  he  find  so  much  as  a  word  that  may  convey  a  false  im- 
pfHiiiion,  to  amend  it.  Exactness  in  stating  truth  according  to 
the  measure  of  our  intelligence,  is  an  indispensable  condition  of 
justice,  and  of  a  title  to  be  beard. 

^J_P^opositions,  then,  as  they  stood,  are  these : — 

1.  That  "  Rome  has  substituted  for  the  proud  boast  of  semper 
mdem^  a  policy  of  violence  and  change  in  faith." 

2.  That  she  has  refurbished  and  paraded  anew  every  rusty  tool 
she  was  fondly  thought  to  have  disused. 

3.  That  Eo  on©  can  now  become  her  convert  without  renonno- 
iiig  his  moral  and  mental  freedom,  and  placing  his  civil  loyalty 
and  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another. 

4  That  she  ("Rome")  has  equally  repudiated  modern  thought 
and  ancient  history. 

TI.    ThI  FllWf  AMB  THB  PoUBTH  FrOPOSITIONS. 

Of  the  first  and  fourth  of  these  propositions  I  shall  dispost 
father  summarily,  as  they  appear  to  belong  to  the  theological  do- 
main. Tliev  refer  to  a  fact,  and  they  record  an  opinion.  One 
ImI  to  which  they  refer  is  this:  that,  m  days  within  my  memory, 
the  oowtant,  favorite,  and  imposing  argument  of  Roman  contro- 
Tcrsialists  was  the  unbroken  and  absolute  identity  in  belief  of  the 
Boman  Church  from  the  days  of  our  Savior  until  now.  No  one, 
who  has  at  all  followed  the  course  of  this  literature  during  the 
lait  forty  years,  can  fail  to  be  sensible  of  the  change  in  its  pres- 
•nt  tenor.  More  and  more  have  the  assertions  of  continuous 
uniformity  ol  doctrine  receded  into  scarcely  penetrable  shadow. 

♦Lords'  Committee,  March  18, 1826.    Report*  p.  190. 


i 


IN  THBIR  BBAJUXO  ON   CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  W 

More  and  more  have  another  series  of  assertions,  of  a  living  au- 
thority, ever  ready  to  open,  adopt,  and  shape  Christian  doctrine 
according  to  the  times,  taken  tneir  place.  Without  discussing 
the  abstract  compatibility  of  these  lines  of  argument,  I  note  two 
of  the  immense  practical  differences  between  them.  In  the  first, 
the  office  claimed  by  the  Church  is  principally  that  of  a  witness 
to  facts ;  in  the  second,  principally  that  of  a  jud^e,  if  not  a  re- 
vealer,  of  doctrine.  In  the  first,  the  processes  which  the  Church 
undertakes  are  subject  to  a  constant  challenge  and  appeal  to  his- 
tory; in  the  second,  no  amount  of  historical  testimony  can  avail 
against  the  unmeasured  pow^r  of  the  theory  of  development. 
Most  important,  most  pregnant  considerations,  these,  at  least  for 
two  classes  of  persons :  for  those  who  think  that  exaggerated  doc- 
trines of  Church  power  are  among  the  real  and  serious  dangers 
of  the  age ;  and  for  those  who  think  that  against  all  forms,  both 
of  superstition  and  of  unbelief,  one  main  preservative  is  to  be 
found  in  maintaining  the  truth  and  authority  of  history,  and  the 
inestimable  value  of  the  historic  spirit. 

So  much  for  the  fact ;  as  for  the  opinion  that  the  recent  Papal 
decrees  are  at  war  with  modern  thought,  and  that,  purporting  to 
enlarge  the  necessary  creed  of  Christendom,  they  involve  a  vio- 
lent breach  with  history,  this  is  a  matter  unfit  for  me  to  discuss, 
as  it  is  a  question  of  Divinity;  but  not  unfit  for  me  to  have 
mentioned  in  my  article,  since  the  opinion  given  there  is  the 
opinion  of  those  with  whom  I  was  endeavoring  to  reason, 
namely,  the  great  majority  of  the  British  public. 

If  it  is  thought  that  the  word  violence  is  open  to  exception,  I 
regret  I  can  not  give  it  up.  The  justification  of  the  ancient  defini- 
tions of  the  Church,  which  have  endured  the  storms  of  1,500 
years,  was  to  be  found  in  this,  that  they  were  not  arbitrary  or 
willful,  but  that  they  wholly  sprang  from,  and  related  to,  theories 
rampant  at  the  time,  and  regarded  as  menacing  to  Christian  be- 
lief Even  the  canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  have,  in  the 
main,  this  amount,  apart  from  their  matter,  of  presumptive  war- 
rant. But  the  decrees  of  the  present  perilous  Pontificate  have 
been  passed  to  favor  and  precipitate  prevailing  currents  of  opinion 
in  the  ecclesiastical  world  of  Rome.  The  growth  of  what  is  often 
termed  among  Protestants  Mariolatry,  and  of  belief  in  Papal  In- 
fallibility, was  notoriously  advancing,  but  it  seems  not  fast  enough 
to  satisfy  the  dominant  party.  To  aim  the  deadly  blows  of  1854* 
and  1870  at  the  old  historic,  scientific,  and  moderate  school,  was 
surely  an  act  of  violence ;  and  with  this  censure  the  proceeding 
of  1870  has  actually  been  visited  by  the  first  living  theologian 
now  within  the  Roman  communion ;  I  mean  Dr.  John  Henry 
Newman,  who  has  used  these  significant  words,  among  others: 
"  Why  should  an  aggressive  and  insolent  faction  be  allowed  to 
make  the  heart  of  the  just  sad,  whom  the  Lord  hath  not  made 
sorrowful  ?"f 

*  Decree  of  the  Immaculate  Conception. 

fSee  the  remarkable  letter  of  Dr.  Newman  to  Bishop  Ullathome, 
in  the  '  Guardian '  of  April  6,  1870. 


10 


'IHB  TAnCAK  imOIIH^ 


HI.  The  Second  pROPosmoif. 


IN  THEIR  BKARINO  ON  CITIL  ALLEGUNCB. 


11 


I  take  Best  my  second  proposition :  thai  Rome  has  rcfurtiishcd, 
MMt  fwradiil  anew,  every  rusty  tool  she  was  fondly  thought  to 
wife  diattaed. 

Is  this,  then,  a  fact,  or  is  it  not  ? 

I  mnal  asaiime  that  it  is  denied ;  and  therefore  I  can  not  wholly 
IMMs  by  the  work  of  proof.  Bat  I  will  state  in  the  fewest  po«siblo 
wefda,  and  with  references,  a  few  propositions,  all  the  holders  of 
wiiei  have  been  condemned  hj  the  See  of  Rome  durinjr  my  own 
ipneration,  and  especially  within  the  last  twelve  or  fifteen  years. 
And,  in  order  that  I  may  do  nothing  toward  importing  passion 
into  what  is  matter  of  pnre  argamenti  I  will  avoid  citing  any  of 
the  fearfully  energetic  epithets  in  which  the  condemnations  arc 
sometimes  clothed : 

1.  Those  who  maintain  the  liberty  of  the  press.  Encyclical 
Letter  of  Pope  Gregory  XVI.,  in  18»1,  and  of  Fope  Vius  IX.,  in 
1M4. 

2.  Or  the  liberty  of  conscience  and  of  worship.  Encyclical  of 
Pwa  IX.,  December  8,  1864. 

3.  Or  the  liberty  of  speech.  'Syllabus'  of  March  18,  1861. 
Prop.  Ixxix.    Encyclical  of  Pope  Pius  IX.,  December  8,  1864. 

4.  Or  who  contend  that  Papal  judgments  and  decrees  may, 
without  sin,  be  disobeyed,  or  differed  from,  unless  they  treat  of 
the  rules  (dog^mata)  of  faith  or  morals.    Ibid. 

6.  Or  who  assign  to  the  State  the  power  of  defining  the  civil 
npbta  (Jura)  and  province  of  the  Church.  'Syllabus*  of  Pope 
Pins  IX.,  March  8,  1861.    Ibid.  Prop.  xix. 

6.  Or  who  hold  that  Roman  Pontiffs  and  Ecumenical  Councils 
have  transgressed  the  limits  of  their  power,  and  usurped  the 
rights  of  princes.     Ibid.  Prop,  xxiii. 

{It  muMt  be  6orii€  in  mind,  that  "Ecumenical  Councils"  here 
mean  Eoman  Conncik  not  recognized  by  the  rest  of  the  Church, 
The  Omneih  of  the  eartij  Church  did  not  interfere  with  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  civil  power.) 

7.  Or  that  the  Church  may  not  employ  force.  (Ecctesia  viM 
inferendm potestatem  non  habet.)    'Syllabus,'  Prop.  xxiv. 

8.  Or  that  power,  not  inherent  in^the  office  of  the  Episcopate, 
hot  granted  to  it  by  the  civil  authority,  may  be  withdrawn  from 
It  at  the  disefetion  of  that  authority.    Ibid.  Prop.  xxv. 

9.  Or  that  the  {immunilas)  civil  immunity  of  the  Church  and 
its  ministers  depends  upon  civil  right.     Ibid.  Prop.  xxx. 

m  Or  that  m  the  conflict  of  laws,  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  th« 
cml  law  should  prevail.    Ibid.  Prop.  ilii. 

11.  Or  that  any  method  of  inatruction  of  youth,  solely  secular, 
asy  be  approved.    Ibid.  Prop,  xlviii. 

12.  Or  that  knowledge  of  things,  philosophical  and  civil,  may 
and  should  decline  to  be  guided  by  Divine  and  Ecclesiastical  au- 
iliority.    Ibid.  Prop.  Ivii. 

13.  Or  that  marriage  is  not  in  its  essence  a  Sacrament  Ibid. 
Prop.  IX VI. 


( 


14.  Or  that  marriage,  not  sacramentally  contracted  (si  sacror 
mentvm  excludaiur),  has  a  binding  force.     Ibid.  Prop.  Ixxiii. 

15.  Or  that  the  abolition  of  the  Temporal  Power  of  the  Popedom 
would  be  highly  advantageous  to  the  Church.    Ibid.  Prop.  Ixxvi. 

Also  Ixx. 

16.  Or  that  any  other  religion  than  the  Roman  religion  may  be 
esUblished  by  a  State.     Ibid.  Prop.  Ixxvii. 

17.  Or  that  in  "  Countries  called  Catholic,"  the  free  exercise 
of  other  religions  may  laudably  be  allowed.  'Syllabus,'  Prop. 
Ixxviu.  . 

18.  Or  that  the  Roman  Pontiff  ought  to  come  to  terms  with 
progress,  liberalism,  and  modern  civilization.    Ibid  Prop.  Ixxx.* 

This  list  is  now  perhaps  sufficiently  extended,  although  I 
have  as  yet  not  touched  the  decrees  of  1870.  But,  before  quitting 
it,  I  must  offer  three  observations  on  what  it  contains. 

Firstly.  I  do  not  place  all  the  Propositions  in  one  and  the 
same  category ;  for  there  are  a  portion  of  them  which,  as  far  as  I 
can  judge,  might,  by  the  combined  aid  of  fiivorable  construction 
and  vigorous  explanation,  be  brought  within  bounds.  And  I  hold 
that  favorable  construction  of  the  terms  used  in  controversies  is 
the  right  general  rule.  But  this  can  only  be  so  when  construc- 
tion is  an  open  question.  When  the  author  of  certain  proposi- 
tions claims,  as  in  the  case  before  us,  a  sole  and  unlimited  power 
to  interpret  them  in  such  manner  and  by  such  rules  as  he  may 
from  time  to  time  think  fit,  the  only  defense  for  all  others  con- 
cerned is  at  once  to  judge  for  themselves,  how  much  of  unreason 
or  of  mischief  the  words,  naturally  understood,  may  contain. 

Secondly.  It  may  appear,  upon  a  hasty  perusal,  that  neither 
the  infliction  of  penalty  m  life,  limb,  liberty,  or  goods,  on  disobe- 
dient members  of  the  Christian  Church,  nor  the  title  to  depose 
sovereigns,  and^release  subjects  from  their  allegiance,  with  all  its 
revolting  consequences,  has  been  here  re-affirmed.  In  terms, 
there  is  no  mention  of  them ;  but  in  the  substance  of  the  prop- 
ositions, I  grieve  to  say,  they  are  beyond  doubt  included.  For  it 
is  notorious  that  they  have  been  declared  and  decreed  by  "  Rome," 
that  is  to  say,  by  Popes  and  Papal  Councils;  and  the  stringent 
condemnations  of  the  Syllabus  include  all  those  who  hold  that 
Popes  and  Papal  Councils  (declared  ecumenical)  have  trans- 
gressed the  just  limits  of  their  power,  or  usurped  the  rights  of 
princes.  What  have  been  their  opinions  and  decrees  about 
persecution  I  need  hardly  say ;  and  indeed  the  right  to  employ 
physical  force  is  even  here  undisguisedly  claimed  (No.  7). 

teven  while  I  am  writing,  I  am  reminded,  from  an  unquestion- 
able source,  of  the  words  of  Pope  Pius  IX.  himself  on  the  de- 
posing power.  I  add  onlv  a  few  italics ;  the  words  appear  as 
given  in  a  translation,  without  the  original: 

"The  present  Pontiff  used  these  words  in  replying  to  the 
address  from  the  Academia  of  the  Catholic  Religion  (July  21, 
1873):— 

♦For  the  original  passages  from  the  Encyclical  and  Syllabus  of 
Pius  IX.,  see  Appendix  A. 


TBI  TATIOAH  DWBIIS 


•••There  are  many  enrora  leaarding  the  Infallibility :  but  the 
most  malicioM  of  all  is  that  which  includes,  in  that  dogma,  the 
rtffhi  of  depoemir  eovereigns,  and  declaring  the  people  no  longer 
bound  by  the  oblation  of  idelity.  This  riaht  has  now  and 
Jgain,  in  eritieal  circumstances,  been  exercised  by  the  Pontiffs: 
but  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  Papal  Infallibility.  Its  origin  was 
not  the  infallibifity,  but  the  authority  of  the  Pope.  Tliis  au- 
thority,  in  accordance  with  the  public  right,  which  was  then  vig- 
oioui,  and  with  the  acquieseence  of  all  Christian  nations,  who 
revewBDed  in  the  Pope  the  supreme  Judge  of  the  Christian 
Comnioiiwealth,  extended  so  far  as  to  pass  jndgm*int,  even  in 
dml  aWmts,  on  the  acts  of  Princes  and  of  Naiiom:  "  ♦ 

Iiai%,  I  must  observe  that  these  are  not  mere  opinions  of  the 
Pope  himself,  nor  even  are  they  opinions  which  he  might  pater- 
nally rewamend-  to  the  pious  consideration  of  the  faithful.  With 
A*^  promulgation  of  his  opinions  is  unhappily  combined,  in  the 
Encyclical  Letter,  which  virtually,  though  not  expressly,  includes 
the  whole,  a  command  to  all  his  spiritual  children  (from  which 
command  we  the  disobedient  chilaren  are  in  no  way  excluded) 
to  hold  them : 

•^Itaque  onnes  et  singulas  pravas  opinionee  et  doctrinas  singil- 
Mum  hi»c«  Uteris  commemoratag  auctoritate  nostril  Apostolic! 
iwpiwtoui^  proscribi^  atque  damnamus;  easque  ab  omnibus 
tMholicsB  Ecclesim  iliis,  veluti  reprobatas,  proscriptas,  atque 
«*?i25f^  o™ni«»o  haberi  volumus  et  mandamus."    Encycl.  Dec. 

o,  .I0O4. 

Ajid  the  decrees  of  1870  will  presently  show  us,  what  they  es- 
mli«h  at  the  binding  force  of  the  mandate  thus  conveyed  to  the 

'€liii8littii  'World.  *  *^ 


IV.  Thi  Thiso  Pboposition. 

I  now  pa«i  to  the  operation  of  these  extraordinary  declarations 
oiUMiaonal  and  private  duty. 

When  the  cup  of  endurance,  which  had  so  long  been  filling, 
b^n,  with  the  counsel  of  the  Vatican  in  1870,  to  overflow,  the 
umI&iiioiis  and  learned  living  theologian  of  the  Roman  Com- 
munion, Dr.  von  Bollinger,  long  the  foremost  champion  of  his* 
Lhurch,  refused  compliance,  and  submitted,  with  his  temper  un- 
di^iirfoed  and  his  freedom  unimpaired,  to  the  extreme  and  most 
painful  penalty  of  excommunication.  With  him,  many  of  the 
iiiojt  learned  and  respected  theologians  of  the  Roman  Communion 
m  eennaaT  underwent  the  same  sentence.  The  very  few,  who 
elsewhere  (I  do  not  speak  of  Switzerland)  suffered  in  like  man- 
ner, deserve  an  admiration  rising  in  proportion  to  their  fewness. 
It  aeems  as  though  Germany,  from  which  Luther  blew  the 

♦  iOiviiiMition  and  the  See  of  Rome.'  By  Lord  Robert  Montagu. 
Bublin,  1874.  A  Lecture  delivered  under  the  auspices  of  the  Cath- 
ohc  Union  of  Ireland.  I  have  a  little  misgiving  about  the  version: 
but  not  of  a  nature  to  affect  the  substance. 


IN   THKIR   BRVRIXO   ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


13 


, 


mighty  trumpet  that  even  now  echoes  through  the  land,  still  re- 
tained her  pnmacy  in  the  domain  of  conscience,  still  supplied  the 
centuria  pretrogativa  of  the  great  comitia  of  the  world. 

But  let  no  man  wonder  or  complain.     Without  imputing  to  any 
one  the  moral  murder,  for  such  it  is,  of  stifling  conscience  and 
conviction,  I  for  one  can  not  be  surprised  that  the   fermenta- 
tion, which  is  working  through  the  mind  of  the  Latin  Church, 
has  as  yet  (elsewhere  than  in  Germany)  but  in  few  instances 
come  to  the  surface.     By  the  mass  of  mankind,  it  is  morally  im- 
possible that  questions  such  as  these  can  be  adequately  examined ; 
so  it  ever  has  been,  and  so  in  the  main  it  will  continue,  until  the 
principles  of  manufacturing  machinery  shall  have  been  applied, 
and  with  analogous  results,  to  intellectual  and  moral  processes. 
Followers  they  are  and  must  be,  and  in  a  certain  sense  ought  to  be. 
But  what  as  to  the  leaders  of  society,  the  men  of  education  and  of 
leisure?    I  will  try  to  suggest  some  answer  in  few  words.     A 
change  of  religious  profession  is  under  all  circumstances  a  great 
and  awful  thing.     Much  more  is  the  question,  however,  between 
conflicting,  or  apparently  conflicting,  duties  arduous,  when  the  re- 
ligion of  a  man  has  been  changed  for  him,  over  his  head,  and 
without  the  very  least  of  his  mrticipation.     Far  be  it  then  from 
me  to  make  any  Roman  Catholic,  except  the  great  Hierarchic 
Power,  and  those  who  have  egged  it  on,  responsible  for  the  por- 
tentous proceedings  which  we  have  witnessed.     My  conviction  is 
that,  even  of  those  who  may  not  shake  off  the  yoke,  multitudes 
will  vindicate  at  any  rate  their  lovalty  at  the  expense  of  the  con- 
sistency, which  perhaps  in  difficult  matters  of  relieion  few  among 
us  perfectly  maintain.     But  this  belongs  to  the  future ;   for  the 
present,  nothing  could  in  my  opinion  be  more  unjust  than  to  hold 
the  members  of  the  Roman  Church  in  general  already  responsi- 
ble for  the  recent  innovations.     The  duty  of  observers,  who  think 
the  claims  involved  in  these  decrees  arrogant  and  false,  and  such 
as  not  even  impotence  real  or  supposed  ought  to  shield  from  criti- 
cism, is  frank^  to  state  the  case,  and,  by  way  of  friendly  chal- 
lenge,  to   entreat  their  Roman  Catholic  fellow-countrymen  to 
replace  themselves  in  the  position  which  five-and-forty  years  aji;o 
this  nation,  by  the  voice  and  action  of  its  Parliament,  declared  its 
belief  that  they  held. 

Upon  a  strict  re-examination  of  the  language,  as  apart  from  the 
substance  of  my  fourth  Proposition,  I  find  it  faulty,  inasmuch  as 
it  seems  to  imply  that  a  "  convert"  now  joining  the  Papal  Church, 
not  only  gives  up  certain  rights  and  duties  of  freedom,  but  sur- 
renders tnem  by  a  conscious  and  deliberate  act.  What  I  have 
less  accurately  said  that  he  renounced,  I  might  have  more  accu- 
rately said  that  he  forfeited.  To  s{)eak  strictly,  the  claim  now 
made  upon  him  by  the  authority,  which  he  solemnly  and  with  the 
highest  responsibility  acknowledges,  requires  him  to  surrender 
his  mental  and  moral  freedom,  and  to  place  his  loyalty  and  civil 
duty  at  the  mercy  of  another.  There  maj  have  been,  and  may 
be,  persons  who  in  their  sanguine  trust  will  not  shrink  from  this 
result,  and  will  console  themselves  with  the  notion  that  their 
loyalty  and  civil  duty  are  to  be  committed  to  the  custody  of  one 


THE  VATICAN  DiiOKBEa 


iBiich  wiser  Ihan  themselTes.  But  I  mn  sore  Umt  tbere  are  also 
"uonyerts"  who,  when  they  perceive,  will  by  word  and  act  reject 
the  oonsequence  which  relentlees  logic  draws  for  them.  If,  how- 
ef«r,  my  proposition  be  true,  there  is  no  escape  from  the  dilemma. 
Is  it  then  true,  or  is  it  not  true,  that  Borne  requires  a  convert,  who 
now  joins  her,  to  forfeit  his  moral  and  mental  freedom,  and  to 
pllMt  Ilia  limdty  and  civil  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another  ? 

Imniiir  io  place  this  matter  in  as  dear  a  light  as  I  can,  it  will 
be  BMossaiy  to  go  bock  a  little  upon  our  recent  history. 

A  eentu^  ago  we  began  to  relax  that  sjrstem  of  penal  laws 
a|Eainst  Boman  Catholics,  at  once  petti fogginj^  base,  and  cruel, 
wliich  Mr.  Burke  has  scathed  and  blasted  with  his  immortal  elo- 


When  this  process  had  reached  the  point,  at  which  the  question 
whether  they  should  be  admitted  into  Parliament,  there 
afose  a  great  and  prolonged  national  controversy ;  and  some  men, 
who  at  no  time  of  their  lives  were  narrow-mmded,  such  as  Sir 
Buliert^  Peel,  the  Minister,  resisted  the  concession.  The  argu- 
ments in  its  favor  were  obvious  and  strong,  and  they  ultimately 
prevailed.  But  the  strength  of  the  opposing  party  had  lain  in 
the  all^gntion  that,  from  the  nature  and  claims  of  the  Papal 
power,  it  was  not  possible  for  the  consistent  Roman  Catholic  to 
pay  to  the  crown  of  this  country  an  entire  allegiance,  and  that 
the  admission  of  persons,  thus  self-disabled,  to  Parliament  was 
inconsistent  with  the  safety  of  the  State  and  nation;  which  had 
not  very  long  before,  it  may  be  observed,  emerged  from  a  struggle 
for  existence. 

An  answer  to  this  argument  was  indispensable ;  and  it  was  sup- 
plied mainly  from  two  sources.  The  Josephine  Laws,*  Uien 
still  subsisting  in  the  Austrian  Empire,  and  the  arrangements 
which  had  been  made  after  the  peace  of  1815  by  Prussia  and 
the  German  States  with  Pius  VII.  and  Gonsalvi,  proved  that  the 
Pa|Mil  Court  could  submit  to  circumstances,  and  could  allow  ma- 
terial restraints  even  upon  the  exercise  of  its  ecclesiastical  pre- 
rogatives. Here,  then,  was  a  reply  in  the  sense  of  the  phrase 
mimimr  ambulando.  Much  information  of  this  class  was  col- 
lected for  the  information  of  Parliament  and  the  country,  f  But 
there  were  also  measures  taken  to  learn,  from  the  highest  Roman 
Gathiilie  authorities  of  this  country,  what  was  the  exact  situation 
nf  Hie  members  of  that  communion  with  respect  to  some  of  the 
belter  known  exorbitancies  of  Papal  assumption.  Did  the  Pope 
claim  any  temporal  jurisdiction?  Did  he  still  pretend  to  the  ex- 
ercise of  a  power  to  depose  kings,  release  subjects  from  their  al- 

*  See  the  work  of  Count  dal  Pozzo  on  the  'Austrian  Ecclesiastical 
Ijaw.*  Iiondon :  Murray,  1827.  The  Leopoldine  Laws  in  Tuscany 
may  also  be  mentioned. 

fSee  *  Report  from  the  Select  Committee  appointed  to  report  the 
nature  and  substance  of  the  Laws  and  Ordinances  existing  in 
Foreipi  States,  respecting  the  regulation  of  their  Roman  Catholio 
subjects  in  Ecclesiastical  matters,  and  their  intercourse  with  the  See 
of  Jlome.  or  any  other  Foreign  Ecclesiastical  Jurisdiction.'  Printed 
for  the  Mouse  of  Commons  in  1816  and  1817.    Reprinted  1851. 


IN   THEIR  BEARING  ON   CIVIL   ALLEGIANCE. 


15 


legiance,  and  incite  them  to  revolt?  Was  faith  to  be  kept  with 
heretics?  Did  the  Church  still  teach  the  doctrines  of  persecu- 
tion ?  Now,  to  no  one  of  these  questions  could  the  answer  really 
be  of  the  smallest  immediate  moment  to  this  powerful  and  solidly 
compacted  kingdom.  They  were  topics  selected  by  way  of  sam- 
ple ;  and  the  intention  was  to  elicit  declarations  showing  gener- 
ally that  the  fangs  of  mediaeval  Popedom  had  been  drawn,  and 
its  claws  torn  away;  that  the  Roman  svstem,  however  strict  in 
its  dogma,  was  perfectly  compatible  with  civil  liberty,  and  with 
the  institutions  of  a  free  State  molded  on  a  different  religious 
basis  from  its  own. 

Answers  in  abundance  were  obtained,  tending  to  show  that  the 
doctrines  of  deposition  and  persecution,  of  keeping  no  faith  with 
heretics,  and  oi  universal  dominion,  were  obsolete  beyond  re- 
vival; that  every  assurance  could  be  given  respecting  them,  ex- 
cept such  as  required  the  shame  of  a  formal  retractation ;  that 
they  were  in  effect  mere  bugljears,  unworthy  to  be  taken  into  ac- 
count by  a  nation  which  prided  itself  on  being  made  up  of  prac- 
tical men. 

But  it  was  unquestionably  felt  that  something  more  than  the 
renunciation  of  these  particular  opinions  was  necessary  in  order 
to  secure  the  full  concession  of  civil  rights  to  Roman  Catholics. 
As  to  their  individual  loyalty,  a  State  disposed  to  generous  or 
candid  interpretation  had  no  reason  to  be  uneasy.  It  was  only 
with  regard  to  reouisitions,  which  might  be  made  on  them  from 
another  quarter,  that  apprehension  could  exist.  It  was  reason- 
able that  England  should  desire  to  know  not  only  what  the  Pope  * 
mi^ht  do  for  himself,  but' to  what  demands,  by  the  constitution  of 
their  Church,  they  were  liable ;  and  how  far  it  was  possible  that 
such  demands  could  touch  their  civil  duty.  The  theory  which 
placed  every  human  being,  in  things  spiritual  and  things  tem- 
poral, at  the  feet  of  the  Roman  Pontiff,  iiad  not  been  an  idolum 
speeds,  a  mere  theory  of  the  chamber.  Brain-power  never  sur- 
passed^ in  the  political  history  of  the  world  had  been  devoted  for 
centuries  to  the  single  purpose  of  working  it  into  the  practice  of 
Christendom ;  had  in  tne  West  achieved  for  an  impossible  prob- 
lem a  partial  success ;  and  had  in  the  East  punished  the  obsti- 
nate independence  of  the  Church  by  that  Latin  conquest  of  Con- 
stantinople which  effectually  prepared  the  way  for  the  downfall 
of  the  Eastern  Empire,  and  the  establishment  of  the  Turks  in 
Europe.  What  was  really  material  therefore  was,  not  whether 
the  Papal  Chair  laid  claim  to  this  or  that  particular  power,  but 
whether  it  laid  claim  to  some  power  that  included  them  all,  and 
whether  that  claim  had  received  such  sanction  from  the  authori- 
ties of  the  Latin  Church,  that  there  remained  within  her  borders 
absolutely  no  tenable  standing-ground  from  which  war  against  it 


♦At  that  period  the  eminent  and  able  Bishop  Doyle  did  not  scruple 
to  write  as  follows :  "  We  are  taunted  with  the  proceedings  of  Popes. 
What,  my  Lord,  haVe  we  Catholics  to  do  with  the  proceedings  of 
Popes,  or  why  should  we  be  made  accountable  for  them  ?"— 'Essay 
on  tlie  Catholic  Claims.'    To  Lord  Liverpool,  1826,  p.  111. 


16 


f MB  TATfCAH  OBOSBBS 


MitM  be  maintained.  Bid  the  Pope  then  olaip  iiiMIibility  7  Or 
did  he,  either  without  infallibility  or  with  it  (and  if  with  it,  so 
nuoh  the  worse),  claim  an  universal  obedience  from  his  flock? 
▲lid  were  these  claims,  either  or  both,  affirmed  in  his  Church  by 
miiiirilj  which  men  the  least  Papal  of  the  members  of  that 
Cfhareh  nmst  admit  to  be  binding  upon  conscience? 

The  two  first  of  these  questions  were  covered  by  the  third. 
And  well  it  was  that  they  were  so  covered.  For  to  them  no  sat- 
isfiMiOlJ  answer  could  even  then  be  given.  The  Popes  had  kept 
up,  widi  Ddaparatively  little  intermission,  for  well-nieh  a  thou- 
•ami  years  their  ckim  to  dogmatic  infaUibility;  and  had.  at  pe- 
riods within  the  same  tract  of  time,  oflen  enougii  made,  and  never 
retracted,  that  other  claim  which  is  theoretically  less  but  prac- 
tically larger;  their  claim  to  an  obedience  virtually  universal 
from  the  baptized  members  of  the  Church.  To  the  third  question 
it  was  fortunately  more  practicable  to  prescribe  a  satisfactory  re- 
ply. It  was  well  known  that,  in  the  clays  of  its  glory  and  intel- 
lectual power,  the  great  Oallican  Church  had  not  onTv  not  admitted, 
but  haa  denied  Papal  infallibility,  and  had  declared  that  the  local 
laws  and  usaji^s  of  the  Church  could  not  be  set  aside  by  the  will 
of  the  Pontiff.  Nay,  further,  it  was  believed  thai  in  the  main 
these  had  been,  down  to  the  close  of  the  last  century,  the  prevail- 
iBg  opinions  of  the  Cisalpine  Churches  in  communion  with  Rome. 
TEe  Cbmicil  of  Constance  had  in  act  as  well  as  word  shown  that 
the  Pope's  judgments,  and  the  Pope  himself,  were  triable  by  the 
assembled  representatives  of  the  Christian  world.  And  the  Coun- 
cil of  Trent,  notwithstanding  the  predominance  in  it  of  Italian  and 
Human  influences,  if  it  had  not  denied,  yet  had  not  affirmed  either 
proposition. 

All  that  remained  was,  to  know  what  were  the  sentiments  en- 
tertained on  these  vital  points  by  the  leaders  and  guides  of  Ro- 
man Catholic  opinion  nearest  to  our  own  doors.  And  here  testi- 
mony was  offisred,  which  must  not,  and  can  not,  be  forgotten.  ^  In 
part,  this  was  the  testimony  of  witnesses  before  the  Committee 
of  the  House  of  Lords  in  1825.  I  need  quote  two  answers  onl^, 
given  by  the  Prelate,  who  more  than  any  other  represented  his 
Church,  and  influenced  the  mind  of  this  country  in  favor  of  con- 
ceesion  at  the  time,  namely.  Bishop  Doyle.    He  was  asked,* 

**  In  what,  and  how  far,  does  the  Koman  Catholic  profess  to 
obey  the  Pope  ?  " 

He  repliea : 

*'  The  Catholic  professes  to  obey  the  Pope  in  matters  which  re- 
l^tfd  his  religious  faith:  and  in  those  matters  of  ecclesiastical  dis- 
cipline which  have  already  been  defined  by  the  competent  au- 
thorities." 


*  Committees  of  both  Lords  and  Commons  sat ;  the  former  in  1825, 
the  latter  in  1824-5.  The  References  were  identical,  and  ran  as  fol- 
lows: **To  Inquire  into  the  state  of  Ireland,  more  particularly  with 
reference  to  the  circumstances  which  may  have'led  to  disturbances 
in  that  part  of  the  United  Kingdom.**  Bishop  Doyle  was  examined 
March  21,  1S25,  and  April  21,  1825,  before  theLordii, 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEOUNCE. 


n 


And  again: 

"Does  that  justify  the  objection  that  is  made  to  Catholics,  that 
their  allegiance  is  divided  ?"" 

"  I  do  not  think  it  does  in  any  way.  We  are  bound  to  obey  the 
Pope  in  those  things  that  I  have  already  mentioned.  But  our  obe- 
dience to  the  law,  and  the  allegiance  which  we  owe  the  sovereign, 
are  complete,  and  full,  aQd  perfect,  and  undivided,  inasmuch  as 
they  extend  to  all  political,  legal,  and  civil  rights  of  the  king  or 
his  subjects.  I  think  the  allegiance  duo  to  the  kin^,  and  the  al- 
legiance due  to  the  Pope,  are  as  distinct  and  as  divided  in  their 
nature  as  any  two  things  can  possibly  be." 

Such  is  the  opinion  of  the  dead  rrclatc.  We  shall  presently 
hear  the  opinion  of  a  living  one.  But  the  sentiments  of  the  dead 
man  powerfully  operated  on  the  open  and  trustful  temper  of  this 
people  to  induce  them  to  grant,  at  the  cost  of  so  much  popular 
feeling  and  national  traditi(m,  the  great  and  just  concession  of 
1829.  That  concession,  without  such  declarations,  it  would,  to  say 
the  least,  have  been  far  more  difficult  to  obtain. 

Now,  bodies  are  usually  held  to  be  bound  by  the  evidence  of 
their  own  selected  and  typical  witnesses.  But  in  this  instance  the 
colleagues  of  those  witnesses  thought  fit  also  to  speak  collectively. 

Firstrlet  us  quote  from  the  collective  "  Declaration,"  in  the  year 
1826,  of  the  Vicars  Apostolic,  who,  with  Episcopal  authority,  gov- 
erned the  Roman  Catholics  of  Great  Hrifaim  : 

"The  allegiance  which  Catholics  hold  to  be  due,  and  are  bound 
to  pay,  to  their  Sovereign,  and  to  the  civil  authority  of  the  State, 
is  perfect  and  undivided 

"  They  declare  that  neither  the  Pope,  nor  any  other  prelate  or 
ecclesiastical  person  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
hjis  any  right  to  interfere,  directly  or  indirectly,  in  the  Civil  Gov- 
ernment,       .         .  nor  to  (»ppose  in  any  manner  the  per- 
formance of  the  civil  duties  which  are  due  to  the  king." 

Not  less  explicit  was  the  Hierarchy  of  the  Roman  Communion 
in  its  *  Pastoral  Address  to  tlie  Clerj:^  and  Laity  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  in  Ireland,'  dated  January  25,  1826.  This  ad- 
dress contains  a  Declaration,  from  which  I  extract  the  following 
words : 

"  It  is  a  duty  which  they  owe  to  themselves,  as  well  as  to  their 
Protestant  felloiv-snhjects,  whose  good  opinion  they  value,  to  en- 
deavor once  more  to  remove  the  false  imputations  that  have  been 
frequently  cast  upon  the  faith  and  discipline  of  that  Church 
which  is  intrusted  to  their  care,  that  all  may  he  enabled  to  knovf 
with  accuraci/  their  gemiine  principles." 

In  Article  11: —  .         <. 

"  They  declare  on  oath  their  belief  that  it  is  not  an  article  of 
the  Catholic  Faith,  neither  are  they  thereby  required  to  believe, 
that  the  Pope  is  infallible." 

And,  after  various  recitiils,  they  set  forth— 

"After  this  full,  explicit,  and  sworn  declaration,  we  are  utterly 
at  a  loss  to  conceive  on  what  possible  ground  we  could  be  justly 
char^  with  bearing  towards  our  most  gracious  Sovereign  only 
a  divided  allegiance. 


IS 


tni  TATICA2C  DECRBEB 


Tliti'i,  Iwsidca  inucli  else  that  I  will  not  etop  to  quote,  Papal  in- 

llibility  was  most  solemnly  declared  to  be  a  matter  on  which 
©:ich  man  might  think  as  h©/  pleased ;  the  Pope's  power  to  claim 
obedience  wim  strictly  and  narrowly  limited:  it  was  expressly  de- 
nied that  he  had  any  title,  direct  or  indirect,  to  interfere  in  civil 
gofernaeni  Of  the  right  of  the  Pope  to  define  the  limits  which 
ifide  the  civil  from  the  spiritual  by  his  own  authori^,  not  one 
word  is  said  by  the  Prelates  of  either  country. 

Since  that  time,  all  these  propositions  have  been  reversed. 
The  Pope's  infallibility,  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedrd  on  faith  and 
morals,  has  been  declared,  with  the  assent  of  the  Bishops  of  the 
Koman  Church,  to  be  an  article  of  faith,  binding  on  the  con- 
■eieace  of  every  Christian;  his  claim  to  the  obedience  of  his 
spiritual  subjects  has  been  declared  in  like  manner  without  any 
plractical  limit  or  reserve;  and  his  supremacy,  without  any  re- 
serve of  civil  rights,  has  been  similarly  affirmed  to  include  every 
thliig  which  relates  to  the  discipline  and  government  of  the 
Church  throughout  the  world.  And  these  doctrines,  we  now 
knf»w  on  the  highest  authority,  it  is  of  necessity  for  salvation  to 
believe. 

Independently,  however,  of  the  Vatican  Decrees  themselves,  it 
is  necessjiry  for  all  who  wish  to  understand  what  has  been  the 
amount  of  the  wonderful  change  now  consummated  in  the  consti- 
tution «if  the  Latin  Church,  and  what  is  the  present  degradation 
of  its  Episcopal  order,  to  observe  also  the  change,  amounting  to 
revolution,  or  form  in  the  present,  as  compared  with  other  con- 
ciliatory decrees.  Indeed,  that  spirit  of  centralization,  the  ex- 
cesses of  which  are  as  fatal  to  vigorous  life  in  the  Church  as  in 
the  State,  seems  now  nearly  to  have  reached  the  last  and  furthest 
point  of  poB:4ibIe  advancement  and  exaltation. 

When,  in  fact,  we  speak  of  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of  the 
Vatican,  we  use  a  phnise  which  will  not  bear  strict  examination. 
The  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent  were,  at  least,  the  real 
Canons  of  a  real  Council:  and  the  strain  in  which  they  are 
promulgated  is  this :  Jiasc  sacrosancia,  ecumenica,  et  generalis 
Tndeiiiiim  Sifnodns,  in  Spiriiu  Sancto  legitime  congregaia,  in  ed 
pr<E»ideiUihn«  eiJtd^m  tribtu  apostolicia  Leg  a  tin,  hortaiur,  or  rfi*- 
cet,  or  9iaimi,  or  decernit,  and  the  like :  and  its  canons,  as  pub- 
lished in  Rome,  arc  ''Canones  et  decreta  SmrosancU  ectimenid 
(hncilii  TndenUm,"*  and  so  forth.  But  what  we  have  now  to 
do  with  is  the  OonsUtutio  Dogmaiica  Prima  de  Ecclesid  Christie 
fldtlii  ill  Sesmone  ifriid  of  the  Vatican  Council.  It  is  n«)t  a  con- 
ttitntion  made  by  the  Council,  but  one  promulgated  in  the  Coun- 
eilf  And  who  is  it  that  legislates  and  decrees?  It  is  Piua 
^iscopn^,sertfm  Mermrum  Dei:  and  the  seductive  plunil  of  his 
d&ctmms  ei  declwramus  is  simply  the  dignified  and  ceremonious 

•  *  Eonife :  in  Collegio  urbano  de  Propapandit  Fide.'    1833. 

fl  am  aware  that,  m  some  liold,  this  was  the  case  with  the  Council 
of  the  Lateran  in  A.  D.  1215.  But,  first,  this  has  not  been  estab- 
lished ;  secondly,  the  very  gist  of  the  evil  we  arc  dealing  with  con- 
rists  in  following  (and  eiiforting)  precedent's  from  the  age  i>f  I'oik;  In- 
nocent III. 


i 


IN  THBIR  BEARING  ON  CITIL  ALLEOIAXCB. 


19 


"We"  of  Royal  declarations.  The  document  is  dated  Pontificor 
tiU  nostri  Anno  XXV:  and  the  humble  share  of  the  assembled 
Episcopate  in  the  transaction  is  represented  by  sacro  approbante 
concilio.     And  now  for  the  propositions  themselves. 

First  comes  the  Pope's  infallibility:-- 

"  Docemus,  et  divinitus  revelatum  dogma  esse  definimus,  Ko- 
manum  Pontificem,  cum  ex  Cathedra  loquitur,  id  est  cum,  om- 
nium Christianorum  Pastoris  et  Doctoris  munere  fungens,  pro 
supreme  suJl  Apostolica  auctoritate  doctrmam  de  fide  vel  moribua 
ab  universil  Ecclesia  tenendam  definit,  per  assistentiam  divinam, 
ipsi  in  Beato  Petro  promissam,  ea  infallibilitate  pollere  qua  Ui- 
vinus  Redemptor  Bcclesiam  suam  in  definienda  doctrm&  de  fide 
vel  moribus  instructam  esse  voluit :  ideoque  ems  Romani  fontitt- 
cis  definitiones  ex  sese  non  autem  ex  consensu  Ecclesiae  irretormar 

^' WilTit,'  then,  be  said  that  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope  accrues 
only  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedrd  f    No  doubt  this  is  a  very  mar 
terial  consideration  for  those  who  have  been  told  that  the  private 
conscience  is  to  derive  comfort  and  ass"'^*^^^  .^'•^™  *^«/^^*^ 
tions  of  the  Papal  Chair:  for  there  is  no  established  or  accepted 
definition  of  the  phrase  ex  cathedrd,  and  he  has  no  power  to  ob- 
tain one,  and  no  guide  to  direct  him  in  his  choice  a^o°g  «?"J« 
twelve  theories  on  the  subject,  which,  it  is  said  are  bandied  to 
and  fro  among  Roman  theologians,  except  the  despised  and  di^ 
carded  agency  of  his  private  judgment     But  while  thus  sorely 
Lnt^lizeS,  he^s  not  one  whit  protected.     Ff ^  *t^«[«J«J*^^^^f.^^ 
person,  and  one  only,  who  can  uncjuestionably  declare  ex  caM|^ 
drd  what  is  ex  cathedrd  and  what  is  not,  and  who  can  declare  it 
when  and  as  he  pleases.     That  person   is   the  Pope   himself. 
The  provision  is,  that  no  document  he  issues  shall  ^^vahd  with- 
out a  sed;  but  the  seal  remains  under  his  own  sole  lock  and  key. 
Again,  it  may  be  sought  to  plead,  that  the  Pope  is,  after  all 
only  operating  hj  sanctions  which  unquestionably  ^fl^'^g  *?  «^« 
rehVious  domain'    He  does  not  propose  to  mvade  the  country^ 
to  seize  Woolwich,  or  burn  Portsmouth     He  wiU  only,  at  the 
worst,  excommunicate  opponents,  as  he  has  excommunicated  Dr. 
von  Dollinger  and  others.     Is  this  a  good  answer?    After  all^ 
even  in  the  Middle  Ages,  it  was  not  by  the  direct  action  of  fleet* 
and  armies  of  their  o>n  that  the  Popes  conten^ied  w.^^^^^ 
who  were  refractory;  it  was  mainly  by  interdicts,  and  by  there^ 
7usal,  which  they  entailed  when  the  bishops  were  not  bnive 
enough  to  refuse  their  publication,  of  religious  offices  to  the  peo- 
ple  "it  was  thus  that  England  suffered  under  J^«.  France  under 
Hilip  Augustus.  Leon  under  Alphonso  the  Noble,   and  every 
country  in  its  turn.     But  the  inference  may  be  drawn  that  they 
who  while  using  spiritual  weapons  for  such  an  end,  do  not  em- 
ploy temporal  m^ans.  only  fail  to  cmDloy  them  because  they  have 
them  not^   A  religious  society,  whicli  delivers  ^o";y« J?f  «P  F^ 
ual  censures  in  order  to  impede  >he  performance  of  civd  du  i^ 
does  all  the  mischief  that  is   in  its  power  to  do,  and  brings 

♦  •Constitutio  de  Ecclesi4,'  c.  iv. 


20 


'fBB  TATIOAN  DBCSBBS 


into  question,  in  the  fiuse  of  the  State,  its  title  to  civil  protee- 


Will  it  be  said,  inftllj,  that  the  Infallibility  touches  only  mat- 
ter of  faith  and  morals?  Only  matter  of  morals  I  Will  any  of 
Ihe  Roman  casoists  kindly  acauaint  us  what  are  the  departments 
and  functions  of  human  life  which  do  not  and  can  not  mil  within 
the  domain  of  morals?  If  they  will  not  tell  us,  we  must  look 
elsewhere.  In  his  work  entitled  'Literature  and  Dogma,'*  Mr. 
lilMhew  Arnold  quaintly  informs  us — as  they  tell  us  nowadays 
how  many  parts  of  our  poor  bodies  are  solid,  and  how  many  aquc- 
MS— that  about  scTenty-fiTe  per  cent,  of  all  we  do  belongs  to  the 
itprtnent  of  "  conduct."  Conduct  and  morals,  we  may  suppose, 
wsm  nearly  oo^xtonsive.  Three-fourths,  then,  of  life  arc  thus 
lumded  oTer.  But  who  will  guarantee  to  us  the  other  fourth  ? 
Certainly  not  St.  Paul ;  who  says,  "  Whether  therefore  ye  eat,  or 
drink,  or  whatsoever  ye  do,  do  all  to  the  glory  of  God."  And 
"  Whatsoever  ye  do,  in  word  or  in  deed,  do  all  in  the  name  of  the 
IjO«lJc«u8."t  No  I  Such  a  distinction  would  be  the  unwOrthy 
device  of  a  shallow  policy,  vainly  used  to  hide  the  daring  of  that 
wild  ambition  which  at  ftome,  not  from  the  throne  but  from  be- 
hind the  throne,  prompts  the  movements  of  the  Vatican.  I  care 
not  to  ask  if  there  be  dregs  or  tatters  of  human  life,  such  as  can 
escape  from  the  description  and  boundary  of  morals.  I  submit 
that  Duty  is  a  power  which  rises  with  us  in  the  morning,  and 
goes  to  rest  with  us  at  nighi  It  is  coextensive  with  the  action 
of  our  intelligence.  It  is  the  shadow  which  cleaves  to  us,  go 
where  we  will,  and  which  only  leaves  us  when  we  leave  the  light 
of  life.  S<»,  then,  it  is  the  supreme  direction  of  us  in  respect  to 
all  Duty,  which  the  Fontiff  aeclares  to  belong  to  him,  sacro  ap- 
prohante  coneiHo :  and  this  declaration  he  makes,  not  as  an  otiose 
opinion  of  the  schools,  hxkitmwiiiBfidelihui  credetidam  et  knettdam. 

But  we  shall  now  see  that,  even  if  a  loop-hole  had  at  this  point 
been  lell  unclosed,  the  void  is  supplied  bv  another  proirision  of 
the  Deerees.  While  the  reach  of  tlic  Infallibility  is  ns  wide  as  it 
mav  please  the  Fope,  or  those  who  may  prompt  the  Pope,  to 
Mtlce  it,  there  is  somethins;  wider  still,  ana  that  is  the  claim  to 
•n  absoluti^  and  entire  Obeaience.  This  Obedience  is  to  be  ren- 
dered to  his  orders  in  the  cases  I  shall  proceed  to  point  out, 
without  any  qualifying  condition,  such  as  the  ex  cathedra.  The 
founding  name  of  Infiillibility  has  so  fascinated  the  public  mind, 
tnd  riteted  it  on  the  Fourth  Chapter  of  the  Constitution  de  Ec- 
ehtM,  that  its  near  neighbor,  the  Third  Chapter,  has,  at  least  in 
my^  opinion,  received  very  much  less  than  justice.  Let  us  turn 
to  H: 

"  Cujttseun(|ne  ritAs  et  dignitatis  pastores  atque  fideles,  tam  se- 
orsum  singuli  quam  simul  omnes,  offioio  hierarohicae  subordina- 
tionis  verseque  obediential  obstringnntur,  non  solum  in  rebus, 
qnn  ad  fidem  et  mores,  sed  etiam  in  lis,  qu»  ad  disciplinam  et 
wgimen  Bcdesi,  p«r  totem  orb^  diflh..  pertinent     .     .     . 

•Pages  15,  44. 

floor.  X.  SI;  Col.  iii.  7. 


IN  THBiR  BEARING  OK  CITIL  ALLEOIAKCB. 


21 


H«o  est  CatholicsB  veritatis  doctrina,  a  qnk  deviare,  salvA  fide  atque 
salute,  nemo  potest. 

"  Docemus  etiam  et  declai-amus  eum  esse  judicem  snprenmm 
fidelium,  et  in  omnibus  causis  ad  examen  ecclesiasticum  spec- 
tantibus  ad  ipsius  posse  judicium  recurri:  Sedis  vero  ApoBtohc»» 
fcujus  auctoritate  major  non  est,  judicium  a  nemine  fore  retrao^ 
tandum.     Neque  cuiquam  de  ejus  licere  judicare  judicio."* 

Even,  therefore,  where  the  judgments  of  the  Pope  do  not  pre- 
sent the  credentials  of  infallibility,  they  are  unappealable  and 
irreversible :  no  person  may  pass  judgment  upon  them ;  and  aU 
men,  clerical  and  lay,  dispersedly  or  in  tlie  aggregate,  are  bound 
truly  to  obey  them ;  and  from  this  rule  of  Catholic  truth  no  man 
can  depart,  save  at  the  peril  of  his  salvation.  Surely,  it  is  allow- 
able to  say  that  this  Third  Chapter  on  universal  obedience  is  a 
formidable  rival  to  the  Fourth  Chapter  on  Infallibility.  Indeed, 
to  an  observer  from  without,  it  seems  to  leave  the  dignity  to 
the  other,  but  to  reserve  the  stringency  and  efficiency  to  itself. 
The  Third  Chapter  is  the  Merovingian  Monarch ;  the  fourth  la 
the  Carolingian  Mayor  of  the  Palace.  The  third  has  an  overaw- 
ing splendor;  the  fourth,  an  iron  gripe.  Little  does  it  matter  to 
me  wnether  my  superior  claims  infallibilitjir,  so  loM  aa  he  w  en- 
titled to  demand  and  exact  conformity.  This,  it  will  be  obeerved, 
he  demands  even  in  cases  not  covered  by  his  infallibility;  oasM, 
therefore,  in  which  he  admits  it  to  be  possible  that  he  may  be 
wrong,  but  finds  it  intolerable  to  be  told  •©.  A«  he  must  be 
obeyed  in  all  his  judgments  though  not  ex  cathedrd,  it  seems  a 
pity  he  could  not  likewise  give  the  comforting  assoranee  that 
they  are  all  certain  to  be  right. 

But  why  this  ostensible  redfuplication,  this  apparent  surplusage? 
Why  did  the  astute  contrivers  of  this  tangled  scheme  eonolnde 
that  they  could  not  afford  to  rest  content  vnth  pledging  the 
Council  to  Infallibility  in  terms  which  are  not  only  wide  to  a 
high  degree,  but  elastic  beyond  all  measure t    ^  ,'     „  _  .^.       , 

Though  they  must  have  known  perfectly  well  tJ»t  "  feith  and 
morals  '^  carried  every  thing,  or  every  tiiin|5  worth  haying,  m  the 
purely  individual  sphere,  the/  also  knew  just  as  well  «»»*.  •^JJ 
where  the  individual  was  subjugated,  they  might  and  wwild  stiU 
have  to  deal  with  the  State.  ^       .      •     i       i._x    i 

In  mediaval  history,  this  distinction  is  not  only  clear  bu*  glar- 
ing Outside  the  borders  of  some  narrow  and  proscribed  sfeet,  now 
and  then  emerging,  we  never,  or  scarcely  ever,  k^<w  P™*?  *"S 
personal  resistance  to  the  Pope.  The  manfiil  "Protestantism 
of  medi«val  times  had  it*  activity  ahnost  entirely  m  the  sphere 
of  public,  national,  and  state  rights.  Too  much  attention,  m  w 
opinion,  can  not  be  fiwtened  on  this  point  It  is  the  very  root 
and  kernel  of  tiie  matter.  Individual  servitude,  howwer  algect, 
wiU  not  satisfy  the  party  now  dominant  in  the  Latm  Chureh :  the 

Stete  must  also  be  a  slave.  .,..__  •         ^ 

Our  Savior  had  leeogniaed  as  distinct  tiie  two  P»o™«««  «* 

the  oivU  rale  and  tiie  Church:  had  nowhere  intimated  that  flie 


♦  *  Dogmatic  Constitutions,'  etc,  c  iit    Dubiin,  1870,  pp.  3(W3. 


THB  TATIdAH  DB0BSI8 

•piritoal  atitiiority  was  to  cIaiih  the  disposal  of  ph^^sical  force,  and 
ti  control  in  its  own  domain  the  authority  which  is  alone  respon- 
sible for  external  peace,  order,  and  safety  among  civilised  com- 
imiiiities  of  men.  It  has  been  alike  the  poonliarity,  the  pride, 
•iMl  §m.  niisiiftane  of  the  Eoman  Church,  among  Christian  commu- 
■itiei,  to  allow  to  itself  an  unbounded  use,  as  far  as  its  power  would 
go,  of  earthly  instruments  for  spiritual  ends.  We  have  seen  with 
what  ample  assurances  *  this  nation  and  Parliament  were  fed  in 
liii;  how  well  and  roundly  the  full  and  undivided  rights  of  the 
civil  power,  and  the  separation  of  the  two  jurisdictions,  were 
•ilfiiied.  AH  this  had  at  length  been  undone,  as  far  as  Popes 
mmM  mido  it,  in  the  Syllabus  and  the  Encyclical.  It  remained  to 
ocniiilete  the  undoing,  through  the  subserviency  or  pliability  of 
the  Council 

And  the  work  is  now  truly  complete.  Lest  it  should  be  said 
Hlftt  lap remaoT  in  laith  and  morals,  full  dominion  over  personal 
belief  and  conauct,  did  not  cover  the  collective  action  of  men  in 
States,  a  third  Drovince  was  opened,  not  indeed  to  the  abstract 
■asertion  of  Inmllibility,  but  to  the  far  more  practical  and  de- 
cisive deinaiii  of  absolute  Obedience.  And  this  is  the  proper 
work  of  the  Third  Chapter,  to  which  I  am  endeavoring  to  do  a 
tMdT  ja.ti«e.  Let  as  listen  .«a>n  to  >fa>  few  but  pregnant  worfs 
Oil  the  point: 

'*Mon  solum  !n  rebus,  <|ua}  ad  idem  et  mores,  sed  etiam  in  iis, 
qiUB  ad  disciplinam  et  regimen  Ecclesise  per  totum  orbem  diffusso 
fMrtiiieni" 

Absolute  obedience,  it  Is  boldly  declared,  is  due  to  the  Pope, 
tt  tho  peril  of  salvation,  not  alone  in  faith,  in  morals,  but  in  all 
things  which  concern  the  discipline  and  government  of  the 
Church.  Thus  are  swept  into  the  Papal  net  whole  multitudes  of 
facts,  whole  systeiiis  of  government^  prevailing,  though  in  different 
immrn,  in  every  country  of  the  world.  Even  m  the  United 
mSm,  whsr«  the  severance  between  Church  and  State  is  sup- 

0 led  to  be  oomplete,  a  Ions  catalogue  might  be  drawn  of  subjects 
onging  to  the  dontaiii  mm.  competency  of  the  State,  but  also  un- 
denii£ly  aiboting  the  government  of  the  Church;  such  as,  by  way 
of  ttuumple,  marriafra,  burial,  education,  prison  discipline, 
1ilii|ih§my,  poor-relielt  incorporation,  mortmain,  religious  endow- 
ments, vows  of  celibacy  and  obedience.  In  Europe  the  circle  is 
far  wider,  the  points  of  contact  and  of  interlacing  almost  innu- 
merable. But  on  all  matters,  fsspecting  which  any  Pope  may 
think  proper  to  declare  that  they  concern  either  faith,  or  morals, 
or  the  icovemment  or  discipline  of  the  Church,  he  claims,  with  the 
approval  of  a  Council  undoubtedly  Ecumenical  in  the  Boman 
sense,  the  absolute  obedienoe,  at  the  peril  of  salvation,  of  every 
member  of  his  communion. 

Itstomsiiol  as  yet  to  have  been  thought  wise  to  pledge  the 
Counci  in  terms  to  the  Syllabus  and  the  Encyclical.  That 
achievement  is  probabljf  reserved  for  some  one  of  its  sittings  yet 
to  come.    In  the  meantime  it  is  well  to  remember,  that  this  claim 

•  iMteiMr,  Apfiendiz  B. 


i 


IN  THEIR  BBARIXO  OX  CIVIL  ALLEGU^XB. 

ill  respect  of  all  things  affecting  the  discipline  and  government  of 
the  Church,  as  well  as  faith  and  conduct,  is  lodged  in  open  day 
by  and  in  the  reign  of  a  Pontiff,  who  has  condemned  free  speech, 
free  writing,  a  free  press,  toleration  of  non-conformity,  liberty  of 
conscience,  the  study  of  civil  and  philosophical  matters  in  inde- 
pendence of  the  ecclesiaBtical  authority,  marriage  unless  sacra- 
nientally  contracted,  and  the  definition  by  the  State  of  the  civil 
rit'hts  (jura)  of  the  Church;  who  has  demanded  for  the  Church, 
therefore,  the  title  to  define  its  own  civil  rights,  together  with  a 
divine  right  to  civil  immunities,  and  a  right  to  use  physical  force; 
and  who  has  also  proudly  asserted  that  the  Popes  of  the  Middle 
Ages  with  their  councils  did  not  invade  the  rights  of  princes :  as 
for  example,  Gregory  VO,  of  the  Emperor  Henry  IV.;  Inno- 
cent III.,  of  Raymond  of  Toulouse;  Paul  III.,  in  deposing  Henry 
VIII.;  or  Pius  v.,  in  performing  the  like  paternal  ofl&ce  for  Eliz- 
abeth. ...  J  xl_    i. 

I  submit,  then,  that  my  fourth  proposition  is  true :  and  that 
England  is  entitled  to  ask,  and  to  know,  in  what  way  the  obe- 
dience required  by  the  Pope  and  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  is  to 
be  reconciled  with  the  integrity  of  civil  allegiance? 

It  has  been  shown  that  the  Head  of  their  Church,  so  supported 
as  undoubtedly  to  speak  with  its  highest  authority,  claims  from 
Roman  Catholics  a  plenary  obedience  to  whatever  he  may  desire 
in  relation  not  to  faith  but  to  morals,  and  not  only  to  these,  but  to 
all  that  concerns  the  government  and  discipline  of  the  Church: 
that,  of  this,  much  lies  within  the  domain  of  the  State :  that,  to 
obviate  all  misapprehension,  the  Pope  demands  for  himself  the 
right  to  determine  the  province  of  his  own  rights,  and  has  so  de- 
fined it  in  formal  documents,  as  to  warrant  any  and  every  invasion 
of  the  civil  sphere;  and  that  this  new  version  of  the  principles 
of  the  Papal  Church  inexorably  binds  its  members  to  the  admis- 
sion of  these  exorbitant  claims,  without  any  refuge  or  reservation 
on  behalf  of  their  duty  to  tlie  Crown. 

Under  circumstances  such  as  these,  it  seems  not  too  much  to 
ask  of  them  to  confirm  the  opinion  which  we,  as  fellow-country- 
men, entertain  of  them,  by  sweeping  away,  in  such  manner  and 
terms  as  they  may  think  best,  the  presumptive  imputations  which 
their  ecclesiastical  rulers  at  Rome,  acting  autocratically,  appear 
to  have  brought  upon  their  capacity  to  pay  a  solid  and  undivided 
allegiance;  and  to  fulfill  the  engagement  which  their  bishops,  as 
political  sponsors,  promised  and  declared  for  them  in  1825. 

It  would  be  impertinent,  as  well  as  needless,  to  suggest  what 
shtmld  be  said.  All  that  is  requisite  is  to  indicate  in  substance 
that  which  (if  the  foregoing  argument  be  sound)  is  not  wanted, 
and  that  which  is.  What  is  not  vranted  is  vajjue  and  general  as- 
sertion, of  whatever  kind,  and  however  sincere.  What  is 
wanted,  and  that  in  the  most  specific  form  and  the  clearest  terms, 
1  take  to  be  one  of  two  things  ;•  that  is  to  say,  either-- 

1.  A  demonstration  that  neither  in  the  name  of  faith,  nor  m 
the  name  of  morals,  nor  in  the  name  of  the  government  or  dis- 
cipline of  the  Church,  is  the  Pope  of  Rome  able,  by  virtue  of  the 
powers   asserted   for  him  by  the  Vatican  decree,  to  make  any 


I L 


21 


THB  wjmtsm  wmmMm 


clftiin  ajpon  those  who  adhere  to  his  commmiioii,  of  such  a  nataro 
as  ean  impair  the  integrity  of  their  civil  allegiance ;  or  else, 

II.  That,  if  and  when  such  claim  is  made,  it  will,  even  al- 
tfumgii  resiiig  on  the  definitions  of  the  Vatican,  be  repelled  and 
rejeiied ;  just  as  Bishop  Doyle,  when  he  was  asked  what  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  clergy  would  do  if  the  Pope  intermeddled  with 
their  relimon,  fepued  frankly,  "  The  consequence  would  be,  that 
w©  should  oppose  him  by  every  means  in  our  power,  even  by  the 
exercise  of  our  spiritual  authority."  * 

In  the  absence  of  explicit  assurances  to  this  effect,  we  should 
appear  to  be  led,  nay,  chriven,  by  just  reasoning  upon  that  docu- 
aeiitarT  evidence,  to  the  conclusions : — 

1.  That  the  Pope,  authoriied  by  his  Couneil,  claims  for  him- 
■iif  the  domain  (a)  of  faith,  (b)  of  morals,  (c)  of  all  that  con- 
cerns the  government  and  discipline  of  the  Church. 

2.  That  he  in  like  manner  claims  the  power  of  determining 
the  limits  of  those  domains. 

3.  That  he  does  not  sever  them,  by  any  acknowledged  or  in. 
telligible  line,  from  the  domains  of  civil  duty  and  allegiance. 

4.  That  he  therefore  claims,  and  claims  from  the  month  of 
Jn^,  1870,  onward  with  plenary  authority,  from  every  convert 
and  member  of  his  Churcn,  that  he  shall  "place  his  lojralty  and 
civil  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another:  "  that  other  being  himself. 


¥.  Beino  True,  abb  the  Pjcofositions  Material  ? 

But  next,  If  these  propositions  be  true,  are  they  also  material  ? 
The  claims  can  not,  as  I  much  fear,  be  denied  to  have  been  made. 
It  can  not  be  denied  that  the  Bishops,  who  govern  in  things 
■pintaal  more  than  five  millions  (or  nearly  one-sixth)  of  the  in- 
Imbitants  of  the  United  Kingdom,  have  in  some  cases  promoted, 
in  all  cases  accepted,  these  claims.  It  has  been  a  favorite  nur- 
pose  of  my  life  not  to  conjure  up,  but  to  conjure  down,  puolic 
alarms.  1  am  not  now  going  to  pretend  that  either  foreign  foe  or 
dumestic  treason  can,  at  the  bidding  of  the  Court  of  Rome,  dis- 
turb these  peaceful  shores.  But  though  such  fears  may  be  vis- 
ionary, it  is  more  visionary  still  to  suppose  for  one  moment  that 
the  claims  of  Gregory  Vll.,  of  Innocent  III.,  and  of  Boniface 
Tin.,  have  been  disinterred,  in  the  nineteenth  century,  like  hid* 
•<MS  miiiiiiies  picked  out  of  Egyptian  sarcophagi,  in  the  inters 
Mta  of  archieology,  or  without  a  definite  and  practical  aim.  As 
Vilional  bcinp,  we  must  rest  assured  that  only  with  a  very 
chsrlj  coneeived  and  foregone  purpose  have  these  astonishing 
re-asaertions  been  paraded  before  the  world.  What  is  that  pup- 
posel 

I  can  well  believe  that  it  is  in  part  theological.  There  have 
always  been,  and  there  still  are,  Ho  small  proportion  of  our  race» 
and  those  by  no  means  in  all  respects  the  worst,  who  are  sorely 
open  to  the  temptation,  especially  in  times  of  religious  disturb- 


•  • 


Report/  March  18, 1826,  p.  191. 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON   CIVIL  ALLEQIANOE. 


25 


V; 


ance,  to  discharge  their  spiritual  responsibilities  by  power  of  at- 
iorney.  As  advertising  Houses  find  custom  in  proportion,  not  so 
much  to  the  solidity  of  their  resources  as  to  the  magniloquence 
of  their  premises  and  assurances,  so  theological  boldness  in  the 
extension  of  such  claims  is  sure  to  pay,  by  widening  certain  cir- 
cles of  devoted  adherents,  however  it  may  repel  the  mass  of  man- 
kind. There  were  two  special  encouragements  to  this  enterprise 
at  the  present  day :  one  of  them  the  perhaps  unconscious  but 
manifest  leaning  of  some,  outside  the  Roman  precinct,  to  undue 
exaltation  of  Church  power ;  the  other  the  reaction,  which  is 
and  must  be  brought  about  in  favor  of  superstition,  by  the  levity 
of  the  destructive  speculations  so  widely  current,  and  the  nota- 
ble hardihood  of  the  antichristian  writing  of  the  day. 

But  it  is  impossible  to  account  sufficiently  in  this  manner  for 
the  particular  course  which  has  been  actually  pursued  by  the  Ro- 
man Court.  All  morbid  spiritual  appetites  would  have  been 
amply  satisfied  by  claims  to  infallibility  in  creed,  to  the  preroga- 
tive of  miracle,  to  dominion  over  the  unseen  world.  In  truth 
there  was  occasion,  in  this  view,  for  nothing,  except  a  liberal 
supply  of  Salmonean  thunder : — "  Dum  flammas  Jovis,  et  sonitus 
imitatur  Olympi."  *  All  this  could  have  been  managed  by  a  few 
Tetzels,  judiciously  distributed  over  Europe.  Therefore  the 
question  still  remains,  Why  did  that  Court,  with  policy  forever 
in  its  eye,  lodge  such  formidable  demands  for  power  of  the  vulgar 
kind  in  that  sphere  which  is  visible,  and  where  hard  knocks  can 
undoubtedly  be  given  as  well  as  received? 

It  must  be  for  some  political  object,  of  a  very  tangible  kind, 
that  the  risks  of  so  daring  a  raid  upon  the  civil  sphere  have  been 
deliberately  run. 

A  daring  raid  it  is.  For  it  is  most  evident  that  the  very  asser- 
tion of  principles  which  establish  an  exemption  from  allegiance, 
or  which  impair  its  completeness,  goes,  in  many  other  countries 
of  Europe,  far  more  directly  than  with  us,  to  the  creation  of  po- 
litical strife,  and  to  dangers  of  the  most  material  and  tangible 
kind.  The  struggle,  now  proceeding  in  Germany,  at  once  occurs 
to  the  mind  as  a  palmary  instance.  I  am  not  competent  to  give 
any  opinion  upon  the  particulars  of  that  struggle.  The  institu- 
tions of  Germany,  and  the  relative  estimate  of  State  power  and 
individual  freedom,  are  materially  different  from  ours.  But  I 
must  say  as  much  as  this.  Firstly,  it  is  not  Prussia  alone  that 
is  touched;  elsewhere,  too,  the  bone  lies  ready,  though  the  con- 
tention may  be  delayed.  In  other  States,  in  Austria  particularly, 
there  are  recent  laws  in  force,  raising  much  the  same  issues  as 
the  Falck  laws  have  raised.  But  the  Roman  Court  possesses  in 
perfection  one  art,  the  art  of  waiting;  and  it  is  her  wise  maxim 
to  fight  but  one  enemy  at  a  time.  Secondly,  if  I  have  truly  rep- 
resented the  claims  promulgated  from  the  Vatican,  it  is  difficult  to 
deny  that  those  claims,  and  the  power  which  has  made  them,  are 
primarily  responsible  for  the  pains  and  perils,  whatever  they  may 
be,  of  the  present  confiict  between  German  and  Roman  enact- 


*  JSn.  vi.  586. 

3 


2(* 


Tlii:   YATk-.VX    IIIBCKKKH 


m  TEEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEOUNCB. 


27 


m®nt*.  Antl  that  wliieh  was  once  truly  said  of  France,  may  now 
also  be  said  with  not  lem  truth  of  Germany :  when  Germany  is 
diaqiiieted.  Europe  cao  not  be  at  rest. 

1  should  feel  less  anxietj  on  thia  subject  had  the  Supreme  Pon- 
tiff franklv  recognized  his  altered  position  since  the  events  of 
1870;  and,  in  language^  as  dear,  if  not  as  emphatic,  as  that  in 
which  he  has  proscribed  modern  civilization,  given  to  Europe  the 
assurance  that  he  would  be  no  party  to  the  re-establishment  b^ 
blood  and  violence  of  the  Temporal  Power  of  the  Church.  It  is 
easy  to  conceive  that  his  personal  benevolence,  no  less  than  his 
fcefingis  as  an  Italian,  must  have  inclined  him  individually  to- 
wards a  course  so  humane;  and  I  should  add,  if  I  might  do  it 
without  presumption,  so  prudent.  With  what  appears  to  an 
English  ©y®  a  lavish  pn>digality,  successive  Italian  government 
have  made  over  the  ecclesijistical  powers  and  privileges^  of  the 
Monarchy,  not  to*  the  Church  of  the  country  for  the^  revival  of 
the  ancient,  popular,  and  self-governing  elements  of  its  constitu- 
tion, but  to  the  Papal  Chair,  for  the  establishment  of  ecclesias- 
tical despotism,  and  the  supnression  of  tlie  last  vestiges  of  inde- 
pendence. This  course,  tto  tiifficult  for  a  foreigner  to  appreciate, 
or  even  to  justify,  has  been  met,  not  by  reciprocal  conciliation, 
but  by  a  constant  fire  of  denunciations  and  complaints.  When 
the  tone  of  these  denunciations  and  complaints  is  compared  with 
the  language  of  the  authorized  and  favored  Papal  organs  in  the 
press,  and  of  the  Ultramontane  party  (now  the  solo  legitimate 
party  of  the  Latin  Church)  throughout  Europe,  it  leads  many  to 
the  painful  and  revolting  conclusion  that  there  is  a  fixed  purpose 
among  the  secret  inspirers  of  Roman  policy  to  pursue,  by  the 
road  of  force,  upon  th«!  arrival  of  any  tavorable  opportunity,  the 
favorite  project  of  re-erecting  the  terrestrial  throne  of  the  Pope- 
dom, even  if  it  can  <inly  be  re-erected  on  the  ashes  of  the  city,. 
and  amidst  the  whitening  bones  of  the  people.* 

It  is  difficult  to  conceive  or  contemplate  the  effects  of  such  an 
endeavor.  But  the  existence  at  this  day  of  the  policy,  even  in 
bar®  idea,  is  itself  a  portcnttius  evil.  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that 
it  is  an  incentive  to  general  disturlmnce,  a  premium  upon  Eu- 
ropean wars.  It  is  in  my  opinion  not  sanguine  only,  but  almost 
ridiculous  to  imagine  that  sui^h  a  project  could  eventually  suc- 
ceed ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  overestimate  the  effect  which  it  might 
pfodnce  in  generating  and  exasperating  strife.  It  might  even,  to 
som©  extent,  disturb  and  paralyze  the  action  of  such  Governments 
as  might  interpose  for  no  separate  purpose  of  their  own,  but  only 
with  a  view  to  the  maintenance  or  restoration  of  the  general 
peace.  If  the  baleful  Power  which  is  expressed  by  the  phrase 
Ciin'a  Ronmna,  and  not  at  all  adequately  rendered  in  its  historic 
force  by  the  usual  English  equivalent  "Court  of  Rome,"  really 
entertains  the  scheme,  it  doubtless  counts  on  the  support  in  every 
country  of  an  organized  and  devoted  partv ;  which,  when  it  can 
command  the  scales  of  political  power,  will  promote  interference, 
and,  when  it  is  in  a  minority,  will  work  for  securing  neutrality. 

*  Api>end!x  C. 


As  the  peace  of  Europe  may  be  in  jeopardy,  and  as  the  duties 
even  of  England,  as  one  (so  to  speak)  of  its  constabulary  author- 
ities, might  come  to  be  in  question,  it  would  be  most  interesting 
to  know  the  mental  attitude  of  our  Roman  Catholic  fellow-coun- 
trymen in  England  and  Ireland  with  reference  to  the  subject ;  and 
it  seems  to  be  one  on  which  wc  are  entitled  to  solicit  information. 

For  there  can  not  be  the  smallest  doubt  that  the  temporal  power 
of  the  Popedom  comes  within  the  true  meaning  of  the  words  used 
at  the  Vatican  to  describe  the  subjects  on  which  the  Pope  is  au- 
thorized to  claim,  under  awful  sanctions,  the  obedience  of  the 
"  faithful."  It  is  even  possible  that  we  have  here  the  key  to  the 
enlargement  of  the  province  of  Obedience  beyond  the  limits  of 
Infallibility,  and  to  the  introduction  of  the  remarkable  phrase  ad 
disciplinam  et  regimen  EcclesicE.  No  impartial  person  can  deny 
that  the  question  of  the  temporal  power  very  evidently  concerns 
the  discipline  and  government  of  the  Church — concerns  it,  and 
most  mischievously  as  I  should  venture  to  think;  but  in  the 
opinion,  up  to  a  late  date,  of  many  Roman  Catholics,  not  only 
most  beneficially,  but  even  essentially.  Let  it  be  remembered, 
that  such  a  man  as  the  late  Count  Montalembert,  who  in  his  gen- 
eral politics  was  of  the  Liberal  party,  did  not  scruple  to  hold 
that  the  millions  of  Roman  Catholics  throughout  the  world  were 
copartners  with  the  inhabitants  of  the  States  of  the  Church  in 
regard  to  their  civil  government ;  and,  as  constituting  the  vast 
majority,  were  of  course  entitled  to  override  them.  It  was  also 
rather  commonly  held,  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago,  that  the  ques- 
tion of  the  States  of  the  Church  was  one  with  which  none  but 
Roman  Catholic  powers  could  have  any  thing  to  do.  This  doc- 
trine, I  must  own,  was  to  me  at  all  times  unintelligible.  It  is 
now,  to  say  the  least,  hopelessly  and  irrecoverably  obsolete. 

Archbishop  Manning,  who  is  the  head  of  the  Papal  Church  in 
England,  and  whose  ecclesiastical  tone  is  supposed  to  be  in  the 
closest  accordance  with  thtit  of  his  headquarters,  has  not  thought 
it  too  much  to  say  that  the  civil  order  of  all  Christendom  is  the 
offspring  of  the  Temporal  Power,  and  has  the  Temporal  Power 
for  its  key-stone ;  that  on  the  destruction  of  the  Temporal  Power 
"the  laws  of  nations  would  at  once  fall  in  ruins;  "  tnat  (our  old 
friend)  the  deposing  Power  "taught  subjects  obedience  and  princes 
clemency."*  Nay,  this  high  authority  has  proceeded  further; 
and  has  elevated  the  Temporal  Power  to  the  rank  of  necessary 
doctrine : 

"The  Catholic  Church  can  not  be  silent,  it  can  not  hold  its 
peace ;  it  can  not  cease  to  preach  the  doctrines  of  Revelation, 
not  only  of  the  Trinity  and  of  the  Incarnation,  but  likewise  of 
the  Seven  Sacraments,  and  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Church  of 
God,  and  of  the  necessity  of  Unity,  and  of  the  Sovereignty^  both 
spiritual  and  temporal,  of  the  Holy  See."f 


**  Three  Lectures  on  the  Temporal  Sovereignty  of  the  Popes,'  1860, 
pp.  34,  46,  47,  58-9,  63. 

t  'The  Present  Crisis  of  the  Holy  See.'  By  H.  E.  Manning,  D.  D. 
London,  1861,  p.  73. 


TIIK   VATIOAX    DI-XrRKBB 

I  mmr,  for  my  own  part,  lieard  that  the  work  oontoining  this 
»iii«ri«ble  paasage  was  placed  in  the  '  Index  Prohibitorum  Li- 
brorain.'  On  the  contrary,  it»  distinguished  author  w^  elevated, 
on  the  firet  opportunity,  to  the  headship  of  the  Konian  Episcopacy 
in  England,  and  to  the  guidance  of  the  million  or  thereabouts  of 
Bouls  in  its  communion.  And  the  more  recent  uttemnces  of  the 
oracle  have  not  descended  from  the  high  level  of  those  already 
®ited.  They  have,  indeed,  the  recommendation  of  a  comment, 
mot  without  fair  claims  to  authority,  on  the  recent  declarations 
of  the  Pope  and  the  Council;  and  of  one  which  goes  to  prove 
how  far  I  am  from  having  exaggerated  or  strained  in  the  foregoing 

Eages  the  meaning  of  those  declarations.  Especially  does  this 
old  good  on  the  one  point,  the  most  vital  of  the  whole  — the 
title  to  define  the  bordfer  line  of  the  two  provinces,  which  the 
Archbishop  not  unfairly  takes  to  be  the  tr^ie  criterion  of  the 
supremacy,  as  between  rival  powers  like  the  Church  and  the 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGUNCE. 


29 


If,  then,  the  civil  power  be  not  competent  to  decide  the  limite 
of  the  spiritual  power,  and  if  th©  spiritual  power  can  define,  with 
ft  divine  certointv,  its  own  limit*,  it  is  evidently  supreme.  Or,  in 
other  words,  the  ^spiritual  pwer  knows,  with  divine  certainty,  the 
limitR  of  its  own  jurisdiction :  and  it  knows  therefore  the  limits 
and  the  competence  of  the  civil  power.  It  is  thereby,  in  matters 
of  religion  and  conscience,  supreme.  I  do  not  see  how  this  can 
be  denied  without  denying  Christianity.  And  if  tiiis  be  so,  this 
is  the  doctrine  of  the  Bull  Unam  Saneiam*  and  of  the  Syllabus, 
and  of  the  Vatican  (Council.  It  is,  in  fact,  Ultramontanism,  for 
this  term  means  neither  less  nor  more.    The  Church,  therefore, 

is  separate  and  supreme  ,       «     .         ...    .1. 

"Let  us  then  ascertain  somewhat  further  what  is  the  meaning 
of  supreme.  Any  power  which  is  independent,  and  can  alone 
fix  the  iimits  of  ih  own  jurisdiciion,  and  can  iherebtj  fx  the 
'iimits  of  ail  other  jiinsdktiom,  is,  ipso  facto,  supreme.j  But 
the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ,  within  the  sphere  of  revelation,  of 
faith  and  morals,  is  all  this,  or  is  nothing,  or  worse  than  nothing, 
an  imposture  and  an  usurpation  —  that  is,  it  is  Christ  or  Anti- 
christ t 

But  the  whole  pamphlet  should  be  read  by  those  who  desire  to 

know  the  true  sense  of  the  Papal  declarations  and  Vatican  decrees, 
as  they  are  understood  by  the  most  favored  ecclesiastics ;  under- 
stood,! am  bound  to  own,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  in  their  natural, 
legitimate,  and  inevitable  sense.  Such  reiuiers  will  be  assisted 
bv  the  treatise  in  seeing  clearly,  and  in  admitting  frankly  that, 
whatever  demands  may  hereafter,  and  in  whatever  circumstances, 
be  made  upon  us,  we  shall  be  unahle  to  advance  with  any  fairnesa 
the  plea  that  it  has  been  done  without  due  notice. 


♦On  the  Bull  iMnm  Sanrtmrif  "o!  a  most  odious  kind;  '*  see  Bishop 
l)oyle*8  Essay,  already  cited.    He  thus  describes  it. 

fThe  italics  are  not  in  the  original. 

i '  Csesarism  and  Ultraiiiontanism.'  By  Archbishop  Manning,  1874, 
pp.  35-€. 


!• 


There  are  millions  upon  millions  of  the  Protestants  of  this 
country  who  would  agree  with  Archbishop  Manning,  if  he  were  sim- 
ply telling  us  that  Divine  truth  is  not  to  be  sought  from  the  lips  of 
the  State,  nor  to  be  sacrificed  at  its  command.  But  those  millions 
would  tell  him,  in  return,  that  the  State,  as  the  power  which  is 
alone  responsible  for  the  external  order  of  the  world,  can  alone 
conclusively  and  finally  be  competent  to  determine  what  is  to  take 
place  in  the  sphere  of  that  external  order. 

I  have  shown,  then,  that  the  Projwsitions,  especially  that 
which  has  been  felt  to  be  the  chief  one  among  them,  being  true, 
are  also  material ;  material  to  be  generally  known,  and  clearlv 
understood,  and  well  considered  on  civil  grounds ;  inasmuch  as 
they  invade,  at  a  multitude  of  points,  the  civil  sphere,  and  seem 
even  to  have  no  very  remote  or  shadowy  connection  with  the 
future  peace  and  security  of  Christendom. 


VT.  Were  the  Propositions  proper  to  be  set  forth   by  the 

PRESENT  Writer? 

There  remains  yet  before  us  only  the  shortest  and  least  signifi- 
cant portion  of  the  inquiry,  namely,  whether  these  things,  being 
true,  and  being  material  to  be  said,  were  also  proper  to  l^e  said 
by^  me.  I  must  ask  pardon,  if  a  tone  of  egotism  be  detected  in 
this  necessarily  subordinate  portion  of  my  remarks. 

For  thirty  years,  and  in  a  great  variety  of  circumstances,  in 
office  and  as  an  independent  Member  of  Parliament,  in  majorities 
and  in    small  minorities,  and  during  the  larger  portion  of  the 
time*  as  the  representative  of  a  great  constituency,  mainly  cler- 
ical, I  have,  with  others,  labored  to  maintain  and  extend  the  civil 
rights  of  my  Roman  Catholic  fellow-countrymen.     The  Liberal 
party  of  this  country,  with  which  I  have  been  commonly  asso- 
ciated, has  8ufi*ered,  and  sometimes  suflbred  heavily,  in  public 
favor  and  in  influence,  from  the  belief  that  it  was  too  ardent  in 
the  pursuit  of  that  policy;  while  at  the  same  time  it  has  always 
been  in  the  worst  odor  with  the  Court  of  Rome,  in  consequence 
of  its  (I  hope)  unalterable  attachment  to  Italian  liberty  and  in- 
dependence.     I    have   sometimes   been  the   spokesman  of  that 
prty  in  recommendations  which  have  tended  to  foster  in  fact  the 
imputation  I  have  mentioned,  though  not  to  warrant  it  as  a  mat- 
ter of  reason.     But  it  has  existed  in  fact.     So  that  while  (as  I 
think)  general  justice  to  society  rec^uired  that  these  things  which 
I  have  now  set  forth  should  be  written,  special  justice,  as  toward 
the  party  to  which  I  am  loyally  attached,  and  which  I  may  have 
had  a  share  in  thus  placing  at  a  disadvantage  before  our  country- 
men, made  it,  to  say  the  least,  becoming  that  I  should  not  shrink 
lirom  writing  them. 

In  discharging  that  office,  I  have  sought  to  perform  the  part 
not  of  a  theok)gical  partisan,   but  simply  of  a  good  citizen ;  of 

■W— ' I       II mm  11.11  i_ii 

•From  1847  to  1865  I  sat  for  the  University  of  Oxford. 


m 


■fit  V    V  M.  1*T/T  M.  Hff     'TI1iy*1?  WW 


one  Iiopcful  that  many  of  his  Roman  CathoHo  fnends  and  fellow* 
countrymen,  who  are,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  as  good  citizens  as 
Mrnself,  may  perceire  thst  the  case  is  not  a  frivolous  case,  but 
one  that  merits  their  attention. 

I  will  next  proceed  to  give  the  reason  why,  up  to  a  recent 
date,  I  have  thought  it  right  in  the  main  to  leave  to  any  others, 
who  might  feel  it,  the  duty  of  dealing  in  detail  with  this  question. 

The  great  change,  which  seems  to  me  to  have  been  brought 
about  in  the  position  ofKoman  Catholic  Christians  as  citizens, 
reached  its  consummation,  and  came  into  full  operation  in  July, 
1870,  by  the  proceedings  or  so-called  decrees  of  the  Vatican 
Council. 

Up  to  that  time,  opinion  in  the  Roman  Church  on  all  matters 
involving  civil  liberty,  though  partially  and  sometimes  widely  in- 
timidated, was  free  wherever  it  was  resolute,  During  the  Middle 
Ages,  heresy  was  often  extinguished  in  blood,  but  in  every  Cis- 
alpine country  a  principle  of  liberty,  to  a  great  extent,  held  its 
own,  and  national  life  refused  to  be  put  down.  Nay,  more,  these 
pfecious  and  inestimable  gifts  had  not  infrequently  for  their 
ehampions  a  local  prelacy  and  clergy.  The  Constitutions  of 
Clarendon,  cursed  from  tho"^  Papal  throne,  were  the  w^ork  of  the 
English  Bishops.  Stephen  Langton,  appointed  directly,  through 
an  extraordinary  stretch  of  power,  by  Innocent  III.,  to  the  See  of 
Canterbury,  headed  the  Barons  of  England  in  extorting  from  the 
Fapul  minion  John,  the  worst  and  basest  of  all  our  Sovereigns, 
that  Magna  Charta  which  the  Pope  at  once  visited  with  his  anath- 
emas. In  the  reign  of  Henry  Vlll.,  it  was  Tunstal,  Bishop  of 
Durham,  who  first  wrote  against  the  Papal  domination.  Tunstal 
was  followed  by  Gardiner;  and  even  the  recognition  of  the  Royal 
Headship  was  voted  by  the  clergy,  not  under  Cranmer,  but  under 
his  unsuspected  predecessor  Warham.  Strong  and  domineering 
m  was  the  high  Papal  party  in  those  centuries,  the  resistance 
was  manful.  Thrice  in  history,  it  seemed  as  if  what  we  may  call 
the  Constitutional  part?  in  the  Church  was  about  to  triumph: 
first,  at  the  epoch  of  the  Council  of  Constance ;  secondly,  when 
the  French  Episcopate  was  in  conflict  with  Pope  Innocent  XL; 
thirdly,  when  Clement  XIV.  leveled  with  the  dust  the  deadliest 
foes  that  mental  and  moral  liberty  have  ever  known.  But  from 
July,  1870,  this  state  of  things  has  passed  away,  and  the  death- 
warmnt  of  that  Constitutional  party  has  been  signed,  and  sealed, 
and  promulgated  in  form. 

Before  that  time  arrived,  although  I  had  used  expressions  suf- 
ficiently indicative  as  to  the  tendency  of  things  in  the  great 
Latin  Communion,  yet  I  had  for  very  u>any  years  felt  it  to  be 
the  first  and  paramount  duty  of  the  British  Legislature,  whatever 
Rome  might  say  or  do,  to  give  to  Ireland  all  that  justice  could 
demand,  in  regard  to  matters  of  conscience  and  of  civil  equality, 
and  thus  to  set  herself  right  in  the  opinion  of  the  civilized 
world.  So  far  from  seeing,  what  some  believed  they  saw,  a 
spirit  of  unworthy  compliance  in  such  a  course,  it  appeared  to 
me  the  only  one  which  suited  either  the  dignity  or  the  duty  of 
ny  country.    While  this  debt  remained  unpaid,  both  before  and 


IN  THEIR  BKARDfG  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.  31 

after  1870,  I  did  not  think  it  my  province  to  open  formally  a 
hne  of  argument  on  a  question  of  prospective  rather  than  imme- 
diate moment,  which  might  have  prejudiced  the  matter  of  duty 
lying  nearest  our  hand,  and  morally  injured  Great  Britain  not 
less    than  Ireland,    Churchmen   and    Nonconformists    not   less 
than  adherents  of  the  Papal  Communion,  by  slackening  the  dis- 
position to  pay  the  debt  of  justice.    When  Parliament  had  passed 
the  Church  Act  of  1869  and  the   Land  Act  of  1870,   there  re- 
mained only,  under  the  great  head  of  Imperial  equity,  one  seri- 
ous question  to  be  dealt  with— that  of  the  higher  education.     I 
consider  that  the  Liberal  majority   in  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  the  Government  to  which  I  had  the  honor  and  satisfaction 
to  belong,  formally  tendered  payment  in  full  of  this  portion  of 
the  debt  by  the  Irish  University  Bill  of  February,  18i3.     Some 
indeed  think  that  it  was  overpaid;  a  question  into  which  this  is 
manifestly  not  the  place  to  enter.     But  the  Roman  Catholic  prel- 
acy of  Ireland  thought  fit  to  nmeure  the  rejection  of  that  meas- 
ure, by  the  direct  influence  which  they  exercised  over  a  certain 
number  of  Irish  Members  of  Parliument,  and  by  the  temptation 
which    they  thus    ofiered— the   bid,  in    effect,  which  (to  use  a 
homely  phrase)  they  made,  to  attract  the  support  of  the  Tory 
Opposition.    Their  efforts  were  crowned  with  a  complete  success. 
From    that   time  forward  I   have   felt   that    the  situation   was 
changed,  and  that  important  matters  would  have  to  be  cleared  by 
suitable  explanations.      The  debt  to  Ireland  had  been  jxiid:   a 
debt  to  the  country  at  large  had  still  to  be  disposed  of,  and  this 
has  come  to  be  the  duty  of  the  hour.     So  long,  indeed,  as  I  con- 
tinued to  be  Prime  Minister,  I  should   not  have  considered  a 
broad  political  discussion  on  a  general  question  suitable  to  pro- 
ceed from  me;  while  neither  I  nor  (I  am  certain)  my  colleaguoa 
would  have  been  disposed  to  run   the  risk  of  stirring  popular 
passions  by  a  vulgar  and  unexplained  appeal.     But  every   diffi- 
culty, arising  from  the  necessary  limitations  of  an  official  posi- 
tion, has  now  beea  removed. 

m 

VII.    On  the  Home  Policy  of  the  Future. 

I  could  not,  however,  conclude  these  observations  without  an- 
ticipating and  answering  an  inciuiry  they  suggest.  "Are  they, 
then,"  it  will  be  asked,  "a  recantation  and  a  regret;  and  what 
are  they  meant  to  recommend  as  the  policy  of  the  future?"  My 
reply  shall  be  succinct  and  plain.  Of  what  the  Liberal  party  has 
accomplished,  by  word  or  deed,  in  establishing  the  full  civil 
equality  of  Roman  Catholics,  I  regret  nothing,  and  I  recant 
nothing. 

It  is  certainly  a  political  misfortune  that,  during  the  last  thirty 
years,  a  Church  so  tainted  in  its  views  of  civil  obedience,  and  so 
unduly  capable  of  changing  its  front  and  language  after  Emanci- 
pation from  what  it  had  been  before,  like  an  actor  who  has  to 
perform  several  characters  in  one  piece,  should  have  acquired  an 
extension  of  its  hold  upon  the  highest  classes  of  this  country. 


32 


THB  TATICAN  DWBiaS 


The  conquesfci  hare  been  chiefly,  as  might  haVe  been  expected, 
among  women ;  but  the  numl>er  of  male  converts,  or  captives  (aa 
I  might  prefer  to  call  them),  has  not  been  inconsiderable.  There 
is  no  doubt,  that  every  one  of  these  secessions  is  in  the  nature 
of  a  considerable  moral  and  social  severance.  The  breadth  of 
this  gap  varies,  according  to  varieties  of  individual  character. 
Bui  it  18  too  commonly  a  wide  one.  Too  commonly,  the  spirit 
®f  III®  neophyte  is  expressed  by  the  words  which  have  become 
notorious  :  "a  Catholic  first,  an  Englishman  afterward."  Words 
which  properly  convey  no  more  than  a  truism ;  for  every  Chris- 
tian must  seek  to  place  his  religion  even  !>efore  his  country  in 
lis  inner  heart  But  very  far  from  a  truism  in  the  sense  in 
which  we  Imve  been  led  to  construe  them.  We  take  them  to 
mimii  that  the  "convert"  intends,  in  case  of  any  conflict  between 
Ihe  Queen  and  the  Pope,  to  follow  the  Pope,  and  let  the  Queen 
shift  for  herself;  which,  happily,  she  can  well  do. 

Usually,  in  this  country,  a  movement  in  the  highest  class 
would  raise  a  presumption  of  a  similar  movement  in  the  mass. 
It  is  not  so  here.  Rumors  have  gone  ab(jut  that  the  proportion 
iif  members  of  the  Papal  Church  to  the  population  has  in- 
creased, especially  in  England.  But  these  rumors  would  seem 
to  be  confuted  by  authentic  figures.  The  Koman  Catholic  Mar- 
riages, which  supply  a  competent  test,  and  which  were  489  per 
cent,  of  the  whole  in  1854,  and  4-62  percent,  in  1^59,  were  409 
per  cent  in  1869,  and  4  02  per  cent  in  1871. 

There  is  something  at  the  least  abnormal  in  such  a  partial 
growth,  taking  effect  as  it  does  among  the  wealthy  and  noble, 
while  the  people  can  not  be  charmed,  by  any  incantation,  into 
the  Roman  camp.  The  original  Gospel  was  supposed  to  be  meant 
especially  for  the  poor;  but  the  gospel  of  the  nineteenth  century 
from  Rome  courts  another  and  less  modest  destination.  If  the 
Pope  does  not  control  more  souls  among  us,  he  certainly  controls 
more  acres. 

The  severance,  however,  of  ii  certain  number  of  lords  of  the 
soil  from  those  who  till  it,  ctin  be  borne.  And  so  I  trust  will  in 
like  manner  be  endured  the  new  and  very  real  "agmression  "  of 
the  principles  promulgjited  by  Papal  authority,  whether  they  are 
or  are  not  loyally  disclaimed.  In  this  matt(?r,  each  man  is  his 
own  judge  and  his  own  guide :  I  can  speak  for  myself.  T  am  no 
longer  able  to  s:iy,  as  1  would  have  said  before  1870,  "There  is 
nothing  in  the  necessary  belief  of  the  Roman  Catholic  which  can 
•ppear  to  impeach  his  full  civil  title;  ISir,  whatsoever  be  the 
follies  of  ecclesiastical  power  in  his  Church,  his  Church  itself  has 
not  reouired  of  him,  with  binding  authority,  to  assent  to  any 
nrincipies  inconsistent  with  his  civil  duty."  That  ground  is  now, 
for  the  present  at  least,  cut  from  under  my  feet.  What  then  is 
to  be  our  course  of  policy  hereafter?  First  let  me  say  that,  as 
regards  the  gresit  Imperial  settlement,  achieved  by  slow  degrees, 
which  has  nlmitted  men  of  all  creeds  subsisting  among  us  to  Par- 
liament, that  I  conceive  to  be  so  determined  beyond  all  doubt  or 
auestion,  as  to  have  become  one  of  the  deep  foundatioa-stones  of 
iio  existing  Constitution.    Bat  inasmuch  as^  short  of  this  great 


1 


DT  THEIR  BEARING   OX  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


3a 


i 


I 


charter  of  public  liberty,  and  independently  of  all  that  has  been 
done,  there  are  pending  matters  of  comparatively  minor  moment 
which  have  been,  or  may  be,  subjects  of  discussion,  not  without 
interest  attaching  to  them,  I  can  suppose  a  question  to  arise  in 
the  minds  of  some.  My  own  views  and  intentions  in  the  future 
are  of  the  smallest  significance.  But,  if  the  arguments  I  have 
here  offered  make  it  my  duty  to  declare  them,  I  say  at  once  the 
future  will  be  exactly  as  the  past :  in  the  little  that  depends  on  me, 
I  shall  be  guided  hereafter,  as  heretofore,  by  the  rule  of  main- 
taining equal  civil  rights  irrespectively  oif  religious  differences; 
and  shall  resist  all  attempts  to  exclude  the  members  of  the  Roman 
Church  from  the  benefit  of  that  rule.  Indeed  I  may  say  that  I 
have  already  given  conclusive  indications  of  this  view,  by  sup- 
porting in  Parliament,  as  a  Minister,  since  1870,  the  repeal  of 
the  Ecclesiastical  Titles  Act,  for  what  I  think  ample  reasons. 
Not  only  because  the  time  has  not  yet  come  when  we  can  as- 
sume the  consequences  of  the  revolutionary  measures  of  1870  to 
have  been  thoroughly  weighed  and  digested  by  all  capable  men 
in  the  Roman  Communion.  Not  only  because  so  great  a  numer- 
ical proportion  are,  as  1  have  before  obser^xd,  necessarily  inca- 
pable of  mastering,  and  forming  their  personal  judgment  upon, 
the  case.  Quite  irrespectively  even  of  these  considerations,  I 
hold  that  our  onward  even  course  should  not  be  changed  by  fol- 
lies, the  consequences  of  which,  if  the  worst  come  to  the  worst, 
this  country  will  have  alike  the  power  and,  in  case  of  need,  the 
will  to  control.  The  State  will,  1  trust,  be  ever  careful  to  leave 
the  domain  of  religious  conscience  free,  and  yet  to  keep  it  to  its 
own  domain ;  and  to  allow  neither  private  caprice  nor,  above  all, 
foreign  arrogance  to  dictate  to  it  in  the  discharge  of  its  proper 
office.  "  England  expects  every  man  to  do  his  duty ;  "  and  none 
can  be  so  well  prepared  under  all  circumstances  to  exact  its  per- 
formance as  that  Liberal  party  which  has  done  the  work  of  jus- 
tice alike  for  Nonconformists  and  for  Papal  dissidents,  and  whose 
members  have  so  often,  for  the  sake  of  that  work,  hazarded  their 
credit  with  the  markedly  Protestant  constituencies  of  the  country. 
Strong  the  State  of  the  United  Kingdom  has  always  been  in 
material  strength;  and  its  moral  panoply  is  now,  we  may  hope, 
pretty  complete. 

It  is  not  then  for  the  dignity  of  the  Crown  and  people  of  the 
United  Kingdom  to  be  diverted  from  a  path  which  they  have  de- 
liberately chosen,  and  which  it  does  not  rest  with  all  the  myrmidons 
of  the  Apostolic  Chamber  either  openly  to  obstruct,  or  secretly  to 
undermine.  It  is  rightfully  to  be  expected,  it  is  greatly  to  be  de- 
sired, that  the  Roman  Catholics  of  this  country  should  do  in  the 
Nineteenth  century  what  their  forefathers  of  England,  except  a 
handful  of  emissaries,  did  in  the  Sixteenth,  when  they  M^ere  mar- 
shaled in  resistance  to  the  Armada,  and  in  the  Seventeenth  when, 
in  despite  of  the  Papal  Chair,  they  sat  in  the  House  of  Lords  un- 
der the  Oath  of  Allegiance.  That  which  we  are  entitled  to  desire, 
we  are  entitled  also  to  expect :  indeed,  to  say  we  did  not  expect 
it,  would,  in  my  judgment,  be  the  true  way  of  conveying  an  "  in- 
sult "  to  those  concerned.    In  this  expectation  we  may  be  par- 


34 


APPBXDICES. 


APPENDICES. 


35 


llfl 


tially  disappointed.  Should  those  to  whom  I  appeal,  thus  unhap- 
pilj  come  to  bear  witness  in  their  own  persons  to  the  decay  of 
Mnnd,  manly,  true  life  in  their  Church,  it  will  be  their  loss  more 
Hutu  ours.  The  inhabitants  of  these  islands,  as  a  whole,  are  sta- 
We,  though  sometimes  credulous  and  excitable ;  resolute,  though 
sometimes  boastful :  and  a  strong-headed  and  sound-hearted  race 
will  not  be  hindered,  either  by  latent  or  by  avowed  dissents,  duo 
to  the  foreip  influence  of  a  oaste,  from  the  accomplishment  of 
Ms  mission  m  the  world. 


APPENDICES. 


i 


APPENDIX  A. 

f%§  imMhen  here  ffimn  wrrmpfmA  with  thme  of  the  Eighteen  ProposUhns 
gmm  in  the  ter<,  where  it  wouid  have  been  km  cmmntent  to  cite  the 
#ri|gp»tMils. 

1,  2,  3.  "Ex  qua  omnino  falsi  socialis  reKiminis  idei  baud  ti- 
aient  erroneam  illam  fovere  opinionem,  Catholic®  Ecclcsiae,  ani- 
narumque  saluti  maxime  exitialom,  a  reo.  mem.  Gregorio  XIV. 
prfledecessore  Nostro  deUramenium  appellatam  (eadem  Encyel. 
miinri),  nimirum,  libertatem  conscientiae  et  cultuum  esse  propri- 
uai  oujuscunque  hominis  jus,  quod  lege  proclamari,  et  asseri  debet 
in  omni  recte  constitute  societate,  et  jus  civibus  inesse  ad  omni- 
Modmn  libertatem  nulla  vel  ecclesiastici,  vel  civili  auctoritate 
UHtreliiiidam,  quo  suos  conceptus  quoscumque  sive  voce  sive  typis, 
si¥e  alii  ratione  palam  pubhceque  manifestare  ac  declarare  vale- 
ant." — EneycHcal  Letter. 

4.  "Atque  silentio  praeterire  non  possumus  eorum  audacmm, 

3m  sanam  non  sustinentes  doctrinam  'ill is  ApostolicfB  Sedis  ju- 
ioiis,  et  decretis,  quorum  objectum  ad  bonum  generalc  Ecclesiae, 
ejusdemque  jura,  ac  disciplinam  spectaro  declaratur,  dummodo 
fidei  monimque  dogmata  non  attingat,  posse  assensum  et  obedi- 
entiam  detrectari  absque  peccato,  et  absque  ulli  CatholicaB  profes- 
sionis  jiicturi.'  " — Ibid. 
6.  "Ecclesia  non  est  vera  perfectaque  socictas  plane  libera,  ne© 

Sollet  suis  propriis  et  constantibus  juribua  sibi  a  divino  suo  Fun- 
•tore  collatis,  sed  civilis  potestatis  est  definire  quae  aint  Ecclesiae 
Jura,  ac  limites,  intra  quos  eadem  jura  exercere  queat."— %^ 

IthUM  V. 

6.  "  Romani  Pontifices  et  Concilia  oecumenica  a  limitibus  8U» 
imtmtiitis  recesserunt,  jura  Principum  usurpirunt,  »tque  etiam  in 
f®bns  idei  et  morum  deiniendis  errarunt." — Ibid,  xxiii. 


7.  "  Ecclesia  vis  inferendae  potestatem  non  habet,  neque  p^otes- 
tatem  ullam  temporalem  directam  vel  indirectam." — Ibid.  xxiv. 

8.  "Praeter  potestatem  episcopatui  inhaerentem,  alia  est  attri- 
buta  temporalis  potestas  a  civili  imperio  vel  expresse  vel  tacit^ 
concessa,  revocanda  propterea,  cum  libuerit,  a  civili  imperio." — 

Ibid.  XXV. 

9.  "  Ecclesiae  et  personarum  ecclesiasticarum  immunitas  a  jure 
civili  ortum  habuit." — Ibid.  xxx. 

10.  "  In  conflictu  legum  utriusque  potestatis,  jus  civile  praeva- 
let"— Ibid,  xlii 

11.  "  Catholicis  viris  probari  potest  ea  juventutis  instituendae 
ratio,  quae  sit  a  Catholica  fide  et  ab  EcclesiaB  potestate  sejuncta, 
quaeque  rerum  dumtaxat,  naturalium  scientiam  ac  terrenae  soci- 
alis vitae  fines  tantummodo  vel  saltern  primarium  spectet." — Ibid. 
xlviii. 

12.  "  Philosophicarum  rerum  morumque  scientia,  itemque  civ- 
iles  leges  possunt  et  debent  a  divina  et  ecclesiastic^  auctoritate 
declinare.'  — Ibid.  Ivii. 

13.  "Matrimonii  sacramentum  non  est  nisi  contractu!  acces- 
sorium  ab  eoque  separabile,  ipsumque  sacramentum  in  una  tan- 
tum  nuptiali  benedictione  situm  est." — Ibid.  Ixvi. 

*'Vi  contractils  mere  civilis  potest  inter  Christianos  constare 
veri  nominis  matrimonium ;  falsumque  est,  aut  contractum  matri- 
monii inter  Christianos  semper  esse  sacramentum,  aut  nullum 
esse  contractum,  si  sacramentum  excludatur." — Ibid.  Ixxiii.     • 

14.  "  De  temporalis  regni  cum  spirituali  compatibilitate  dis- 
putant inter  se  Chris tianae  et  Catholicae  Ecclesiae  filii." — Sylla- 
bus Ixxv. 

15.  "Abrogatio  civilis  imperii,  quo  Apostolica  Sedes  potitur,  ad 
Eccleaiae  libertatem  felicitatemque  vel  maxime  conduceret." — 
Ibid.  Ixxvi. 

16.  "^tate  hac  nostra  non  amplius  expedit  religionem  Cath- 
olicam  haberi  tanquam  unicam  status  religionem,  caeteris  quibus- 
cumque  cultibus  exclusis." — Ibid.  Ixxvii. 

17.  "Hinc  laudabiliter  in  quibusdam  Catholici  nominis  regi- 
onibus  lege  cautum  est,  ut  hominibus  illuc  immigrantibus  liceat 

f)ublicum    proprii   cujusque   cultus  exercitium   habere." — Ibid. 
xxviii. 

18.  "Romanus  Pontifex  potest  ac  debet  cum  progressu,  cum 
liberalismo  et  cum  recenti  civilitate  sese  reconciliare  et  compo- 
pere." — Ibid.  Ixxx. 


APPENDIX  B. 


I  have  contented  myself  with  a  minimum  of  citation  from  the 
documents  of  the  period  before  Emancipation.  Their  full  effect 
can  only  be  gathered  by  such  as  are  acquainted  with,  or  will 
take  the  trouble  to  refer  largely  to,  the  originals.  It  is  worth 
while,  however,  to  cite  the  following  passage  from  Bishop  Doyle, 


■Ml 


APPBXBICBB. 


APPENDICES. 


37 


m  it  maj  convey,  through  the  indignation  it  expresses,  an  idea 
of  the  amplitude  of  the  assurances  which  had  been  (as  I  believe 
Bost  honestly  and  sincerely)  given. 

•*  There  is  no  justice,  my  Lord,  in  thus  condemning  us.  Such 
conduct  on  the  part  of  our  opponents  creates  in  our  bosoms  a 
sense  of  wrong  being  done  to  ua ;  it  exhausts  our  patience,  it 
provokes  our  indignation,  and  prevents  us  from  reiterating  our 
eibrts  to  obtain  a  more  impartial  hearing.  We  are  tempted,  in 
such  cases  as  these,  to  attribute  unfair  motives  to  those  who  differ 
irom  lis,  as  we  can  not  conceive  how  men  gifted  with  intelligence 
<mii  fail  to  discover  truths  so  plainly  demonstrated  as, 

"  That  our  faith  or  our  allegiance  is  not  regulated  by  any  such 
doctrines  as  those  imputed  to  us; 

"  That  our  duties  to  the  Government  of  our  country  are  not 
influenced  nor  affected  by  any  Bulls  or  practices  of  Popes ; 

"  That  these  duties  are  to  be  learned  by  us,  as  by  every  other 
class  of  His  Majesty's  subjects,  from  the  Gospel,  from  the  reason 
mven  to  us  by  God,  from  that  love  of  country  which  Nature  ha« 
implanted  in  our  hearts,  and  from  those  constitutional  maxims, 
which  are  as  well  understood,  and  as  highly  appreciated,  by  Cath- 
olics of  the  present  day,  as  by  their  ancestors,  who  founded  them 
with  Alfred,  or  secured  them  at  Runnymede." — DoyUs  '  Essaif 
on  the  Catholic  Claims,'  London,  1826,  p.  H8. 

The  same  ge^ieral  tone,  as  in  1826,  was  maintained  in  the 
answers  of  the  witnesses  from  Maynooth  College  before  the  Com- 
mission of  1855.  See,  for  example,  pp.  132,  161-4,  272-3,  275, 
361.  310-5,  381-2,  394-6,  405.  The  Commission  reported  (p.  64), 
"  We  see  no  reason  to  believe  that  there  has  been  any  disloyalty 
in  the  teaching  of  the  college,  or  any  disposition  to  impair  the  ob- 
ligations of  an  unreserved  allegiance  to  your  Majesty. ' 


This  is  a  remarkable  disclosure.  With  whom  could  England 
be  brought  into  conflict  by  any  disposition  she  might  feel  to  keep 
up  the  Italian  kingdom  ?  Considered  as  States,  both  Austria  and 
Jrance  are  in  complete  harmony  with  Italy.  But  it  is  plain 
that  Italy  has  some  enemy ;  and  the  writers  of  the  '  Month  ap- 
pear to  know  who  it  is. 


APPENDIX  D. 


Notice  has  been  taken,  both  in  this  country  and  abroad,  of  the 
apparent  inertness  of  public  men,  and  of  at  least  one  British  Ad- 
ministration, with  respect  to  the  subject  of  these  pages.  See 
Friedberg,  '  Griinzen  zwischen  Staat  und  Kirche,'  Abtheilung  iii. 
pp.  755-6 ;  and  the  Preface  to  the  Fifth  Volume  of  Mr.  Green- 
wood's elaborate,  able,  and  judicial  work,  entitled  'Cathedra 
Petri,'  p.  iv. : 

"  If  there  be  any  chance  of  such  a  revival,  it  would  become  our 
political  leaders  to  look  more  closely  into  the  peculiarities  of  a 
system,  which  denies  the  right  of  the  subject  to  freedom  of 
tnought  and  action  upon  matters  most  material  to  his  civil  and 
religious  welfare.  There  is  no  mode  of  ascertaining  the  spirit 
and  tendency  of  great  institutions  but  in  a  careful  study  of  their 
history.  The  writer  is  profoundly  impressed  with  the  conviction 
that  our  political  instructors  have  wholly  neglected  this  im- 
portant duty :  or,  which  is  perhaps  worse,  left  it  in  the  hands  of 
a  class  of  persons  whose  zeal  has  outrun  their  discretion,  and  who 
have  sought  rather  to  engage  the  prejudices  than  the  judgment 
of  their  hearers  in  the  cause  they  have,  no  doubt  sincerely,  at 
heart." 


'f      ; 


I 


APPENDIX  C. 

Compare  the  recent  and  ominous  forecasting  of  the  future 
European  policy  of  the  British  Crown,  in  an  Article  from  a  Rom- 
ish Periodical  for  the  current  month,  which  has  direct  relation 
to  these  matters,  and  which  has  every  appearance  of  proceeding 
from  authority : 

"  Surely,  in  any  European  complication,  such  as  may  any  day 
arise,  nay,  such  as  must  ere  long  arise,  from  the  natural  gravita- 
tion of  the  forces,  which  are  for  the  moment  kept  in  check  and 
truce  by  the  necessity  of  preparation  for  their  inevitable  collis- 
ion, it  may  very  well  be  that  the  future  prosperity  of  England 
may  be  staked  in  the  struggle,  and  that  the  siae  which  she  may 
take  may  be  determined,  not  either  by  justice  or  interest,  but  by 
n  passionate  resolve  to  keep  up  the  Italian  kingdom  at  any  haz- 
i,«|."_-The  'Month'  for  November,  1874:  'Mr.  Gladstone's  Dur- 
ham Letter,'  p.  265. 


PAGES 


39 


\ 


DR.  NEWMAN'S  LETTER 


TO  THE 


DUKE  OF  NORFOLK, 
IN   REPLY   TO    GLADSTON 


!• 


My  Dear  Duke  op  Norfolk: 

When  I  yielded  to  the  earnest  wish  which  you,  together  with 
'  many  others,  urged  upon  me,  that  I  should  reply  to  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's recent  Expostulation,  a  friend  suggested  that  I  ought  to 
ask  your  Grace's  permission  to  address  my  remarks  to  you.  Not 
that  for  a  moment  he  or  I  thought  of  implicating  you,  in  any 
sense  or  measure,  in  a  responsibility  which  is  solely  and  entirely 
my  own ;  but  on  a  very  serious  occasion,  when  such  hcjavy 
charges  had  been  made  against  the  Catholics  of  England  bjjr  so 
powerful  and  so  earnest  an  adversary,  it  seemed  my  dutj,  in 
meeting  his  challenge,  to  gain  the  support,  if  I  could,  of  a  uame 
which  is  the  special  representative  and  the  fitting  sample  of  a 
laity,  as  zealous  for  the  Catholic  relision  as  it  is  patriotic. 

You  consented  with  something  of  the  reluctance  which  f  had 
felt  myself  when  called  upon  to  write ;  for  it  was  hard  to  be  mm.- 
moned  at  any  age,  early  or  late,  from  a  peaceful  course  of  life 
and  the  duties  of  one's  station,  to  a  scene  of  war.  Still,  you  con- 
sented ;  and,  for  myself,  it  is  the  compensation  for  a  very  un- 
pleasant task,  that  1,  who  belong  to  a  generation  that  is  fast  flit- 
ting away,  am  thus  enabled,  in  what  is  likely  to  be  my  last  pub- 
lication, to  associate  myself  with  one,  on  many  accounts  so  dear 
to  me, — so  full  of  young  promise — whose  career  is  before  him. 

I  deeplv  grieve  that  Mr.  Gladstone  has  felt  it  his  duty  to  speak 
with  such  extraordinary  severity  of  our  Religion  and  of  our- 
selves. I  consider  he  has  committed  himself  to  a  representation 
of  ecclesiastical  documents  which  will  not  hold,  and  to  a  view  of 
our  position  in  the  country  which  we  have  neither  deserved  nor 
can  be  patient  under.  None  but  the  Schola  Theologortim  is  com- 
petent to  determine  the  force  of  Papal  and  Synodal  utterances, 
and  the  exact  interpretation  of  them  is  a  work  of  time.  But  so 
much  may  be  safely  said  of  the  decrees  which  have  lately  been 
promulgated,  and  of  the  faithful  who  have  received  them,  that 
Mr.  Gladstone's  account,  both  of  them  and  of  us,  is  neither  trust- 
worthy nor  charitable. 

Yet  not  a  little  may  be  said  in  explanation  of  a  step,  which  so 

(39) 


J       1 


/ 


/ 


40' 


IXTItODlJCTOBY  REMARKS. 


INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS. 


many  of  bis  admirers  and  well-wishera  deplore.    I  own  to  a  deep 
feeling,  thai  Catholics  may  in  good  measure  thank  themselves,  and 

r-  no  one  else,  for  having  alienated  from  them  so  religious  a  mind. 

^  There  are  those  among  us,  as  it  must  he  confessed,  who  for  years 
past  have  conducted  themselves  as  if  no  responsibility  attached 
to  wild  words  and  overbearing  deeds ;  who  have  stated  truths  in 
the  most  paradoxical  form,  and  stretched  principles  till  they  were 
close  upon  snapping;  and  who  at  length,  having  done  their  beet 
t€  set  the  house  on  fire,  leave  to  others  the  task  of  pattine  out 

I  the  flame.  The  English  people  are  sufficiently  sensitive  of  the 
eklma  of  the  Pope,  without  having  them,  as  if  in  defiance, 
iourished  in  their  faces.  Those  claims  most  certainly  I  am  not 
going  to  deny ;  I  have  never  denied  them.  I  have  no  intention, 
MOW  liiat  I  have  to  write  upon  them,  to  conceal  any  part  of  them. 
And  I  uphold  them  as  heartily  as  I  recognize  my  duty  of  loyalty 
to  the  constitution,  the  laws,  and  the  government  of  England.  I 
see  no  inconsistency  in  my  being  at  once  a  good  Catholic  and  a 
good  Englishman.  Yet  it  is  one  thing  to  be  able  to  satisfy  my- 
self as  to  my  consistency,  quite  another  to  satisfy  others ;  and, 
undisturbed  as  I  am  in  my  own  conscience,  I  have  great  difficul- 
ties in  the  task  before  me.  I  have  one  difficulty  to  overcome  m 
the  present  excitement  of  the  public  mind  against  our  Religion, 
caused  partly  by  the  chronic  extravagances  of  knots  of  Catholics 
here  and  there,  partly  by  the  vehement  rhetoric  which  is  the  oc- 
casion of  my  writing  to  you.  A  worse  difficulty  lies  in  getting 
peovjle,  as  they  are  commonly  found,  to  put  off  the  modes  ot 
spetch  and  language  which  are  usual  with  them,  and  to  enter 
into  scientific  distinctions  and  traditionary  rules  of  interpreta- 
tion, which,  as  being  new  to  them,  appear  evasive  and  unnatural. 
And  a  third  difficulty,  as  I  may  call  it,  is  this— that  in  so  very 
wide  a  subject,  opening  so  great  a  variety  of  questions,  and  of 

.  opinions  upon  them,  while  it  will  be  simply  necessary  to  take  the 
objecliona  made  against  us  and  our  faith,  one  by  one.  readers 
may  think  me  trifling  with  their  patience,  because  they  do  not 
ind  those  points  first  dealt   with,  on  which  they  lay  most  stress 

themselves.  _     .  , 

Bui  I  have  said  enough  by  way  of  preface ;  and  without  more 
delay  turn  to  Mr  Gladstone's  pamphlet. 

|1.  Imtroductory  Rbmarcs. 

The  main  question  which  Mr.  Gladstone  Tias  started  I  consider 
to  be  this :— Can  Catholics  be  trustworthy  subjects  of  the  State  f 
lilts  not  a  foreign  Power  a  hold  over  their  consciences  such,  that 
it  may  at  any  time  be  used  to  the  serious  perplexity  and  injury 
of  the  civil  government  under  which  thej  live?  Not  that  Mr. 
Ghidstone  confines  himself  to  these  questions,  for  he  goes  out  of 
liis  way,  1  am  sorry  to  say.  to  taunt  us  with  our  loss  of  mental 
and  moral  freedom,  a  vituperation  which  is  not  necessary  for  his 
purpese  at  all.  He  informs  us  too  that  we  have  "  repudiated  an- 
clitfthistory,"  and  are  rejecting  "  modern  thought."  and  that  our 


Church  has  been  "  refurbishing  her  rusty  tools,"  and  has  been 
lately  aggravating,  and  is  likely  still  more  to  aggravate,  our  state 
of  bondage.  1  think  it  unworthy  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  high  charac- 
ter thus  to  have  inveighed  against  ua;  what  intellectual  manli- 
ness is  left  to  us,  according  to  him  ?  yet  his  circle  of  acquaintiinco 
is  too  wide,  and  his  knowledge  of  his  countrymen  on  the  other 
hand  too  accurate,  for  him  not  to  know  that  he  is  bringing  a  great 
amount  of  odium  and  bad  feeling  upon  excellent  men,  whose  only 
offense  is  their  religion.  The  more  intense  is  the  preiudice  with 
which  we  are  regarded  by  whole  classes  of  men,  the  less  is  there 
of  generosity  in  his  pouring  upon  us  superfluous  reproaches. 
The  graver  the  charge, 'which  is  the  direct  occasion  of  his  writ- 
ing against  us,  the  more  careful  should  he  be  not  to  prejudice 
judge  and  jury  to  our  disadvantage.  No  rhetoric  is  needed  m 
England  against  an  unfortunate  Catholic  at  any  time ;  but  so  lit- 
tle is  Mr.  Gladstone  conscious  of  his  treatment  of  us  that  in  one 
place  of  his  Pamphlet,  strange  as  it  may  seem,  he  makes  it  his 
boast  that  he  has  been  careful  to  "  do  nothing  towards  importing 
passion  into  what  is  matter  of  pure  argument,"  pp.  15,  16.  I 
venture  to  think  he  will  one  day  be  sorry  for  what  he  has  said. 

However,  we  must  talfO  things  as  we  find  them ;  and  what  I 
propose  to  do  is  this  :  to  put  aside,  unless  it  comes  directly  in  my 
way,  his  accusation  against  us  of  repudiating  ancient  history,  re- 
jecting modern  thought,  and  renouncing  our  mental  freedom,  and 
to  confine  myself  for  the  most  part  to  what  he  principally  insists 
upon,  that  Catholics,  if  they  act  consistently  with  their  princi- 
ples, can  not  be  loyal  subjects.  I  shall  not,  however,  omit  notice 
of  his  attack  upon  our  moral  uprightness. 

The  occasion  and  the  grounds  i)f  Mr.  Gladstone's  impeachment 
of  US,  if  I  understand  him,  are  as  follows : — He  was  alarmed,  as 
a  statesman,  ten  years  ago  by  the  Pope's  Encyclical  of  December 
8,  and  by  the  Syllabus  of  Erroneous  Propositions  which,  by  the 
Pope's  authority,  accompanied  its  transmission  to  the  Bishops. 
Then  came  the  Definitions  of  the  Vatican  Council  in  1870,  upon 
the  universal  jurisdiction  and  doctrinal  infallibility  of  the  Pope. 
And,  lastly,  as  the  event  which  turned  alarm  into  indignation,  and  ~\ 
into  the  duty  of  public  remonstrance,  "the  Roman  Catholic 
Prelacy  of  Ireland  thought  fit  to  procure  the  rejection  of"  the 
Irish  tTniversity  Bill  of  February,  1873,  "by  the  direct  influence 
which  they  exercised  over  a  certain  number  of  Irish  Members  of 
Parliament,"  etc.,  p.  60.  This  step  on  the  part  of  the  Bishops  ^ 
showed,  if  I  understand  him,  the  new  and  mischievous  force 
which  had  been  acquired  at  Rome  by  the  late  acts  there,  or  at 
least  left  him  at  liberty,  by  causing  his  loss  of  power,  to  denounce 
it.     "  From  that  time  forward  the  situation  was  changed,"  and  an 


the  country  had  to  be  disposed  ol.  mat  aeot,  ii  i  am  n^^n, 
will  be  paid,  if  he  can  ascertain,  on  behalf  of  the  country,  that 
there  is  nothing  in  the  Catholic  Religion  to  hinder  its  professors 
from  being  as  loyal  as  other  subjects  of  the  State,  and  that  the 
See  of  Rome  can  not  interfere  with  their  civil  duties  so  as  to  give 


[i 


48 


lyTROOUOTOBY  BBMAItlS. 


fclie  civil  power  trouble  or  alarm.  The  main  ground  on  which  he 
relies  fwr  the  necessity  of  aome  such  inquiry  is,  first,  the  text  of 
the  authoritative  documents  of  18(54  and  1870;  next,  and  still 
more,  the  ammm  which  they  breathe,  and  the  sustained  aggres- 
sive spirit  which  they  disclose;  and,  thirdly,  the  daring  deed  of 
aggression  in  1873,  when  the  Pope,  acting  (m  it  is  alleged)  upon 
the  Irish  Members  of  Parliament,  succeeded  in  ousting  from  their 
seats  a  ministry  who,  besides  past  benefits,  were  at  that  very  time 
doin^  for  Irish  Catholics,  and  therefore  ousted  for  doing,  a  special 
service. 

Now,  it  would  be  preposterous  and  officious  in  me  to  put  my- 
self forward  as  champion  for  the  Venerable  Prelacy  of  Ireland, 
or  to  take  upon  myself  the  part  of  advocate  and  representative 
of  the  Holy  See.  "  Non  tali  auxilio; "  in  neither  character  could 
I  come  forward  without  great  presumption ;  not  the  least  for  this 
feason,  because  I  can  not  know  the  exact  points  which  are  really 
the  gisi  of  the  affiront,  which  Mr.  Gladstone  conceives  he  has  sus- 
tained, whether  from  the  one  quarter  or  from  the  other;  yet  in  a 
question  so  nearly  interesting  myself  as  that  February  bill, 
which  he  brought  into  the  House,  in  great  sincerity  and  kind- 
ness,  for  the  benefit  of  the  Catholic  Unrversity  in  Ireland,  T  may 
be  allowed  to  say  thus  much — that  I,  who  now  have  no  official 
relation  to  the  Irish  Bishops,  and  am  not  in  any  sense .  in  tlie 
councils  of  Rome,  felt  at  once,  when  I  first  saw  the  outline  of 
that  bill,  the  greatest  astonishment  on  reading  one  of  its  pro- 
visions, and  a  dread  ^yhw.h  painfully  affected  me,  lest  Mr.  Glad- 
stone perhaps  was  acting  on  an  understtmding  with  the  Catholic 
Frelacy.  1  did  nut  see  Iujw  in  honor  they  could  accept  it.  It 
was  possible,  did  the  question  come  over  again,  to  decide  in  favor 
of  the  Queen's  Colleges,  and  to  leave  the  project  of  a  Catholic 
University  alone.  The  llolv  8ee^  might  so  have  decided  in  1847. 
But  at  or  about  that  date,  three  rescripts  had  come  from  Rome  in 
fever  of  a  distinctively  Catholic  Institution ;  a  National  Council 
had  decided  in  its  favor ;  large  offers  of  the  government  had  been 
rejected;  great  commotions  had  been  caused  in  the  political 
world ;  munificent  contributions  had  been  made,  all  on  the  sole 
principle  that  Catholic  teaching  was  to  be  upheld  in  the  country 
inviolate.  If,  then,  for  the  sake  of  a  money  grant,  or  other  secu- 
lar advantage,  this  gnmnd  of  principle  was  deserted,  and  Catho- 
lic youths  aHer  all  were  allowed  to  attend  the  lectures  of  men  of 
BO  religion,  or  of  the  Protestant,  the  contest  of  thirty  years 
would  have  been  stultified,  and  the  Pope  and  the  Bishops  would 
seem  to  have  been  playinj^  a  game,  while  putting  forward  the 
plea  of  conscience  and  religious  duty.  I  hoped  that  the  clause 
in  the  Bill,  which  gave  me  such  uneasiness,  could  have  been 
CWiifcted  from  it;  but,  anyhow,  it  was  an  extreme  relief  to  me 
when  the  papers  announced  that  the  Bishops  had  expressed  their 
forsial  dissatisfaction  with  it. 

Thm  determined  to  decline  a  gift  laden  with  such  a  condition, 
and  who  can  blame  them  for  so  ooing  ?  who  can  be  surprised  that 
they  should  now  do  what  they  did  in  1847?  what  new  move  in 
politics  was  it,  if  they  so  determined  ?  what  was  there  in  it  of  a 


*M 


INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS. 


43 


factious  character?  Is  the  Catholic  Irish  interest  the  only  one 
which  is  not  to  be  represented  in  the  House  of  Commons  ?  Why 
is  not  that  interest  as  much  a  matter  of  right  as  any  other  ?  I 
fear  to  expose  my  own  ignorance  of  Parliamentary  rules  and  pro- 
ceedings, but  I  had  supposed  that  the  railway  interest,  and  what 
is  called  the  publican  interest,  were  very  powerful  there;  in 
Scotland,  too,  I  believe,  a  government  has  a  formidable  party  to 
deal  with ;  and,  to  revert  to  Ireland,  there  are  the  Home-rulers, 
who  have  objects  in  view  quite  distinct  from,  or  contrary  to,  those 
of  the  Catholic  hierarchy.  As  to  the  Pope,  looking  at  the  surface 
of  things,  there  is  nothing  to  suggest  that  he  interfered;  there 
was  no  necessity  of  interference  on  so  plain  a  point ;  and,  when 
an  act  can  be  sufficiently  accounted  for  without  introducing  an 
hypothetical  cause,  it  is  bad  logic  to  introduce  it.  Speaking  ac- 
cording to  my  lights,  I  altogether  disbelieve  the  interposition  of 
Rome  in  the  matter.  In  the  proceedings  which  they  aidopted,  the 
Bishops  were   only  usin^;  civil  rights,   common   to   all,  which 


political  oppori 

I  thought  it  was  a  received  theory  of  our  Reformed  Constitution 
that  Members  of  Parliament  were  representatives,  and  in  some 
sort  delegates,  of  their  constituents,  and  that  the  strength  of  each 
interest  was  shown,  and  the  course  of  the  nation  determined,  by 
the  divisions  in  the  House  of  Commons.  I  recollect  the  Times 
intimating  its  regret,  after  one  general  election,  that  there  was  no 
English  Catholic  ih  the  new  House,  on  the  ground  that  every 
class  and  party  should  be  represented  there.  Surely  the  Catholic 
Religion  has  not  a  small  party  in  Ireland ;  why,  then,  should  it  not 
have  a  corresponding  number  of  exponents  and  defenders  at 
Westminster?  So  clear  does  this  seem  to  me,  that  I  think  there 
must  be  some  defect  in  my  knowledge  of  facts  to  explain  Mr. 
Gladstone's  surprise  and  displeasure  at  the  conduct  of  the  Irish 
Prelacy  in  1873 ;  yet  I  suspect  none ;  and,  if  there  be  none,  then 
his  unreasonableness  in  this  instance  of  Ireland  makes  it  not  un- 
likely that  he  is  unreasonable  also  in  his  judgment  of  the  Encyc- 
lical, Syllabus,  and  Vatican  Decrees. 

However,  the  Bishops,  I  believe,  not  only  opposed  Mr.  Glad- 
stofie's  bill,  but,  instead  of  it  they  asked  for  some  money  grant 
towards  the  expenses  of  their  University.  If  so,  their  obvious 
argument  was  this — that  Catholics  formed  the  great  majority  of 
the  population  of  Ireland,  and  it  was  not  fair  that  the  Protestant 
minority  should  have  all  that  was  bestowed  in  endowment  or 
otherwise  upon  Education.  To  this  the  reply,  I  suppose,  would 
be,  that  it  was  not  Protestantism,  but  liberal  education,  that  had 
the  money,  and  that,  if  the  Bishops  chose  to  give  up  their  own 
principles  and  act  as  Liberals,  they  might  have  the  benefit  of  it 
too.  I  am  not  concerned  here  with  these  arguments,  but  I  wish 
to  notice  the  position  which  the  Bishops  would  occupy  in  urging 
such  a  request : — I  must  not  say  that  they  were  Irishmen  first 
and  Catholics  afterwards ;  but  I  do  say  that  in  such  a  demand 
they  spoke,  not  simply  as  Catholic  Bishops,  but  as  the  Bishops  of 


"I 


14 

S  9 


INTBODUOTOBY  REMARKS. 


a  Catholic  nation.  They  did  not  speak  from  any  promptings  of 
the  Kncyclical,  Syllabus,  or  Vatican  Decrees.  They  claimed  as 
Irislimen  a  share  in  the  endowments  of  the  country;  and  has  not 
Ireland  surely  a  right  to  speak  in  such  a  matter,  and  might  not 
her  Bishops  fairly  represent  her?  It  seems  to  me  a  great  mis^ 
take  to  think  that  every  thing  that  is  done  b^  the  Irish  Bishops 
•nd clergy  is  done  on  an  ecclesiastical  motive;  why  not  on  a 
national?  but  if  so,  such  acts  have  nothing  to  do  witJi  Rome.  I 
know  well  what  simple  firm  faith  the  great  bod^  of  the  Irish 
people  bavc,  and  how  they  put  the  Catholic  Religion  before  any 
thing  else  in  the  world.  It  is  their  comfort,  tncir  joy,  their 
Initrure,  their  boast,  their  compensation  for  a  hundred  worldly 
disadvantaees ;  but  who  can  deny  that  in  politics  their  conduct 
at  times-nay,  more  than  at  times-has  had  a  flavor  rather  of 
their  nation  than  of  their  Church  ?  Only  in  the  last  general 
election  this  was  said,  when  they  were  so  earnest  for  Home  Rule. 
Whj,  then,  must  Mr.  Gladstone  come  down  upon  the  Catholic 
Religion,  because  the  Irish  love  dearly  the  Green  Island  and  its 
interests  ?  Ireland  is  not  the  only  country  in  which  politics,^  or 
patriotism,  or  party  has  been  so  closely  associated  with  religion 
m  the  nation  or  a  class,  that  it  is  difficult  to  say  which  of  the  va- 
rious motive  principles  was  uppermost.  "The  Puritan,"  says 
Macaulaj,  "  prostrated  himself  in  the  dust  before  his  Maker,  but 
he  set  his  foot  on  the  neck  of  his  king."  I  am  not  accusing  such 
a  man  (*f  hypocrisy  on  account  of  this ;  having  great  wrongs,  as 
he  considered,  both  in  religious  and  temporal  patters,  and  the 
authors  of  these  distinct  wrongs  being  the  same  persons,  he  did 
not  nicely  discriminate  between  the  acts  whicn  he  did  as  a 
patriot  and  the  acts  which  he  did  as  a  Purifcin.  And  so  as  re- 
gards Irishmen,  they  do  not,  can  not,  distinguish  between  their 
S)ve  of  Ireland  and  their  love  of  religion ;  their  patriotism  is  re- 
ligious, and  their  religion  is  strongly  tinctured  with  patriotism ; 
and  it  is  hard  to  recognize  the  abstract  and  ideal  Ultramontane, 
pure  and  simple,  in  the  concrete  exhibition  of  fiim  in  flesh  and 
blood  as  found  in  the  polling  booth  or  in  his  chapel.  I  do  not 
see  how  the  Pope  can  be  made  answenible  for  him  in  any  of  his 
political  acts  during  the  last  fi%  years. 

This  leads  me  to  a  subject,  of  which  Mr.  Gladstone  makes  a 
good  deal  in  his  Pamphlet  I  will  say  of  a  great  man,  whom  he 
quotes,  and  for  whose  memorj^j  I  have  a  great  respect — I  mean 
Bishop  Doyle — that  there  was  just  a  little  tinge  of  patriotism  in 
the  way  in  which,  on  one  occasion,  he  speaks  of  ttie  Pope.  I 
dare  say  any  of  us  would  have  done  the  same  in  the  heat  of  a 
great  struggle  for  national  liberty ;  for  he  said  nothing  but  what 
was  true  and  honest ;  I  only  mean  that  the  energetic  language 
which  he  used  was  not  exactly  such  as  would  have  suited  the  at- 
Biosphare  of  Rome.  Ho  says  to  Lord  Liverpool,  "We  are 
taunted  with  the  proceedings  of  Popes.  What,  my  Lord,  have 
we  Catholics  to  do  with  the  proceedings  of  Popes,  or  why  should 
we  be  made  accountable  for  them?"  p.  27.  Now,  with  some  pro- 
ceedings of  Popes,  we  Catholics  have  very  much  to  do  indeed ; 
imi,  if  the  context  of  his  words  is  consulted,  I  make  no  doubt  it 


IK1R0DU€T0RY  REMARKS, 


45 


will  b©  found  that  he  was  referring  to  certain  proceedings  of 
certain  Popes  when  he  said  that  Catholics  had  no  part  of  their 
responsibility.  Assuredly,  there  are  certain  acts  of  Popes  in*~> 
which  no  one  would  like  to  have  part.  Then,  again,  his  words  J 
require  some  pious  interpretation  when  he  says  that  "  the  alle- 
giance due  to  the  kins  and  the  allegiance  due  to  the  Pope  are  as 
distinct  and  as  divided  in  their  nature  as  any  two  things  can  pos- 
sibly be,"  p.  30.  Yes,  in  their  nature,  in  the  abstract,  but  ncA  in 
the  particular  case;  for  a  heathen  State  might  bid  me  throw  in- 
cense upon  the  altar  of  Jupiter,  and  the  Pope  would  bid  me  not 
to  do  80.  I  venture  to  make  the  same  remark  on  the  Address 
of  the  Irish  Bishops  to  their  clergy  and  lait^,  quoted  at  p.  31, 
and  on  the  Declaration  of  the  Vicars  Apostolic  in  England,  ibid. 

But  £  must  not  be  supposed  for  an  instant  to  mean,  in  what  I 
have  said,  that  the  venerable  men,  to  whom  I  have  referred,  were 
aware  of  any  ambiguity  either  in  such  statements  as  the  above,  or 
in  others  which  were  denials  of  the  Pope's  infallibility.  Indeed, 
one  of  them  at  an  earlier  date,  1793,  Dr.  Troy,  Archbishop  of 
Dublin,  had  introduced  into  one  of  his  Pastorals  the  subject 
which  Mr.  Gladstone  considers  they  so  summarily  disposed  of. 
The  Archbishop  says : — "  Many  Catholics  contend  that  the  Pope, 
when  teaching  the  universal  Church,  as  their  supreme  visible 
head  and  pastor,  as  successor  to  St  Peter,  and  heir  to  the  prom- 
ises of  special  assistance  made  to  him  by  Jesus  Christ,  is  infalli- 
ble; and  that  his  decrees  and  decisions  in  that  capacity  are  to  be 
respected  as  rules  of  faith,  when  they  are  dogmatical  or  confined 
to  Qoctrinal  points  of  faith  and  morals.  Others  deny  this,  and  re- 
quire the  expressed  or  tacit  acquiescence  of  the  Church,  assembled 
or  dispersed,  to  stamp  infallibility  on  his  dogmatical  decrees.  Un- 
til the  Church  shall  decide  upon  this  (]^ucstion  of  the  Schools, 
either  opinion  may  be  adopted  by  individual  Catholics,  without 
any  lireach  of  Catholic  communion  or  j>eace.  The  Catholics  of 
Ireland  have  lately  declared,  that  it  is  not  an  article  of  the  Cath- 
olic faith ;  nor  are  they  thereby  required  to  believe  or  profess  that 
the  Pope  is  infallible,  without  adopting  or  abjuring  either  of  the 
recited  opinions  which  are  open  to  discussion,  while  the  Church 
continues  silent  about  them. '  The  Archbishop  thus  addressed 
his  flock,  at  the  time  when  he  was  informing  them  that  the  Pope 
had  altered  the  oath  which  was  taken  by  the  Catholic  Bishops. 

As  to  the  language  of  the  Bishops  in  1826,  we  must  recollect 
that  at  that  time  the  clergy,  both  of  Ireland  and  England,  were 
educated  in  Galilean  opinions.  They  took  those  opinions  for 
granted,  and  they  thought,  if  they  went  so  far  as  to  ask  them- 
selves the  question,  that  the  definition  of  Papal  Infallibility  was 
simply  impossible.  Even  among  those  at  the  Vatican  Council, 
who  themselves  personally  believed  in  it,  I  believe  there  were 
Bishops  who,  until  the  actual  definition  had  been  passed,  thought 
that  such  a  definition  could  not  be  made.  Perhaps  thev  would 
argue  that,  though  the  historical  evidence  was  sufficient  for  their 
own  personal  conviction,  it  was  not  sufficiently  clear  of  difficulties 
to  make  it  safe  to  impose  it  on  Catholics  as  a  dogma.  Much  more 
would  this  be  the  feeling  of  the  Bishops  in  1826.     "How,"  they 


m 


IXTRODrCTOmY  REMARKS. 


IXTRODUCTOHr  REMARKS, 


47 


wouM  mk,  "  cftn  it  ever  come  to  pass  that  a  majority  of  our  order 
ihould  ind  it  their  dutv  to  relinquish  their  prime  prerogative, 
and  to  make  the  Church  take  the  shape  of  a  pure  monarchj  ? " 
They  would  think  its  definitioh  as  much  out  of  the  question  as 
that,  in  twenty-five  years  after  their  time,  there  would  be  a  hier- 
iMfehy  of  thirteen  Bishops  in  England,  with  a  Cardinal  for  Arch- 


But,  all  this  while,  such  modes  of  thinking  were  foreign  alto- 
gether to  the  minds  of  the  eniouraf/e  of  the  Holy  See.  Mr.  Glad- 
stone himself  says,  and  the  Duke  of  Wellington  and  Sir  Robert  Peel 
must  have  known  it  as  well  as  he,  "  The  Popes  have  kept  up,  with 
compamtively  little  intermission,  for  well  nigh  a  thousand  years, 
Iheir  claim  to  dopiatic  infallibility."  p.  28.  Then,  if  the  Pope's 
elaim  to  infallibihtv  was  so  patent  a  fact,  could  they  ever  suppose 
that  he  could  he  brought  to  admit  that  it  was  hopeless  to  turn 
tha,t  claim  into  a  dogma?  In  truth,  those  ministers  were  very 
Mtle  interested  in  that  question ;  as  was  said  in  a  Petition  or 
declaration,  siped  among  others  by  Dr.  Troy,  it  was  "immate- 
rial  in  a  political  light; ''  but,  even  if  they  thought  it  material, 
or  if  there  were  other  questions  they  wanted  to  ask,  why  go  to 
Bishop  Doyle?  If  they  wanted  to  obtain  some  real  information 
about  th©  probabilities  of  the  future,  why  did  they  not  go  to 
headquarters?  Why  did  they  potter  about  the  halls  of  Univer- 
sities in  this  matter  of  Papal  exorbitances,  or  rely  upon  the 
mnnhlets  or  examinations  of  Bishops  whom  they  never  asked 

li?*®*'  credentials  ?    Why  not  go  at  once  to  Rome  ? 

Til©  reason  is  plain:  it  was  a  most  notable  instance,  with  a 
grave  consequence,  of  what  is  a  fixed  tradition  with  us  the  Eng- 
lieh  people,  and  a  great  emljarrassment  to  every  administration 
in  their  dealings  with  Catholics.  I  recollect,  years  ago,  Dr.  Grif- 
iths.  Vicar  Apostolic  of  the  London  District,  giving  me  an  ac- 
count of  an  interview  he  had  with  the  late  Lord  Derbv.  then,  I 
■ippose,  Colonial  Secretary.  I  understood  him  to  say  that  Lord 
iJerby  was  in  perplexity  at  the  time,  on  some  West  India  matter, 
in  which  Catholics  were  concerned,  because  h©  could  not  find 
their  responsible  representative.  He  wanted  Dr.  Griffiths  to  un- 
dertake the  office,  and  expressed  something  of  disappointment 
when  the  Bishop  felt  obliged  to  decline  it.  A  chronic  malady 
has  from  time  to  time  its  paroxysms,  and  the  history  on  which  I 
am  now  engaged  is  a  serious  instance  of  it  I  think  it  is  impos- 
sible that  the  British  Government  could  have  entered  into  formal 
negotiations  with  the  Pope,  without  its  transpiring  in  the  course 
of  them,  and  its  becoming  perfectly  clear,  that  Rome  could  never 
be  a  party  to  such  a  pledge  as  England  wanted,  and  that  no 
pledge  from  Catholics  was  of  any  value  to  which  Rome  was  not 
a  party. 

But  no;  they  persisted  in  an  enterprise  which  was  hopeless  in 
Its  first  principle,  for  they  thought  to  break  th©  indissoluble  tie 
which  bound  toother  the  head  and  the  members,— and  doubtless 
Rome  felt  the  insult,  though  she  might  think  it  prudent  not  to 
notic©  it.  France  was  not  tlic  keystone  of  the  oecumenical  power, 
Ifcwigh  her  Church  was  so  great  and  so  famous;  nor  could  th© 


hierarchy  of  Ireland,  in  spite  of  its  fidelity  to  the  Catholic  feith, 
give  any  pledge  of  the  future  to  the  statesmen  who  required  one; 
there  was  but  one  See,  whose  word  was  worth  any  thing  in  th© 
matter,  "  that  church  "  (to  use  the  language  of  the  earliest  of  our 
Doctors)  "  to  which  the  faithful  all  round  about  are  bound  to  have 
recourse."  Yet  for  three  hundred  years  it  has  been  the  official 
rule  with  England  to  ignore  the  existence  of  the  Pope,  and  to 
deal  with  Catholics  in  England,  not  as  his  children,  but  as  sec- 
taries of  the  Roman  Catholic  persuasion.  Napoleon  said  to  his 
envoy,  "  Treat  with  the  Pope  as  if  he  was  master  of  100,000  men."  . 
So  clearly  did  he,  from  mere  worldly  sagacity,  comprehend  the 
Pope's  place  in  the  then  state  of  European  affairs,  as  to  say  that, 
**if  the  Pope  had  not  existed,  it  would  have  been  well  to  hav© 
created  him  for  that  occasion,  as  the  Roman  Consuls  created  a 
dictator  in  difficult  circumstances."  (Alison's  Hist  ch.  35.)  But 
we,  in  the  instance  of  the  greatest,  the  oldest  power  in  Europe,  a 
Church  whose  grandeur  in  past  history  demanded,  one  would 
think,  some  reverence  in  our  treatment  of  her,  the  mother  of 
English  Christianity,  who,  whether  her  subsequent  conduct  had 
always  been  motherly  or  not,  had  been  a  true  friend  to  us  in  th© 
beginnings  of  our  history,  her  we  have  not  only  renounced,  but, 
to  use  a  fiimiliar  word,  we  have  absolutely  cut.  Time  has  gone 
on  and  we  have  no  relentings;  to-day,  as  little  as  yesterday,  do 
we  understand  that  pride  was  not  made  for  man,  nor  the  cud- 
dling of  resentments  for  a  great  people.  I  am  entering  into  no 
theological  question :  I  am  speaking  all  along  of  mere  decent  sec- 
ular intercourse  between  England  and  Rome.  A  hundred  griev- 
ances would  have  been  set  right  on  their  first  uprising,  had  there 
been  a  frank  diplomatic  understanding  between  the  two  great 
powers;  but,  on  the  contrary,  even  within  the  last  few  weeks,  the 
present  Ministry  has  destroyed  anjr  hope  of  a  better  state  of 
things  V»y  withdrawing  from  the  Vatican  the  make-shift  channel 
of  intercourse  which  had  of  late  years  been  permitted  there. 

The  world's  politics  has  its  laws;  and  such  abnormal  courses 
as  England  has  pursued  have  their  Nettiesis.  An  event  has  taken 
place  which,  alas !  already  makes  itself  felt  in  issues,  unfortunate 
for  English  Catholics  certainly,  but  also,  as  I  think,  for  our  coun- 
try. A  great  council  has  been  called;  and,  as  England  has  for 
80  long  a  time  ignored  Rome,  Rome,  1  suppose,  it  must  be  said, 
has  in  turn  ignored  England.  I  do  not  mean  of  set  purpose  ig- 
nored, but  as  the  natural  consequence  of  our  act  Bishops 
brought  from  the  corners  of  the  earth  in  1870,  what  could  they 
know  of  English  blue  books  and  Parliamentary  debates  in  the 
years  1826  and  1829?  It  was  an  extraordinary  gathering,  and 
Its  possibility,  its  purpose,  and  its  issue,  were  alike  marvelous,  as 
depending  on  a  coincidence  of  strange  conditions,  which,  as 
might  be  said  beforehand,  never  could  take  place.  Such  was  the 
long  reign  of  the  Pope,  in  itself  a  marvel,  as  being  the  sole  ex- 
ception to  a  recognized  ecclesiastical  tradition.  Only  a  Pontiff 
so  unfortunate,  so  revered,  so  largely  loved,  so  popular  even  with 
Protestants,  with  such  a  prestige  of  long  sovereignty,  with  such 
claims  on  the  Bishops  around  him,  both  of  age  and  of  paternal 


48 


'fHl  ANOTENT  CHURCH. 


tMB  JLKCIEKT  CHVBOH. 


40 


gracious  acts,  only  such  a  man  could  have  harmonized  and  ^ided 
to  the  conclusion,  which  he  pointed  out,  an  assembly  so  variously 
edmposed.  And,  considering  the  state  of  theological  opinion  sev- 
enty yean  before,  not  less  marvelous  vras  the  concurrence  of  all 
hut  a  few  out  of  so  many  hundred  Bishops  in  the  theological 
judgment,  so  long  desirea  at  Rome ;  the  protest  made  by  some 
eighty  or  ninety,  at  the  termination  of  the  Council,  against  the 
proceedings  of  the  vast  majority  lying,  not  against  the  truth  of 
the  doctrine  then  defined,  but  against  its  opportuneness.  Nor  less 
to  be  noted  is  the  neglect  of  the  Catholic  powers  to  send  repre- 
•enttttives  to  the  Council,  who  might  have  laid  before  the  Fatners 
ite  political  bearings.  For  myself,  I  did  not  call  it  inopportune, 
lor  times  and  seasons  are  known  to  God  alone,  and  persecution 
maybe  as  opportune,  though  not  so  pleasant  as  peace;  nor,  in 
accepting  as  a  dogma  what  1  had  ever  held  as  a  truth,  could  I  be 
doini;  violence  to  any  theological  view  or  conclusion  of  my  own : 
nor  has  the  acceptance  of  it  any  logical  or  practical  effect  what- 
ever, as  I  consider,  in  weakening  my  allegiance  to  Queen  Victoria; 
but  there  are  few  Catholics,  I  think,  who  will  not  deeply  regret, 
though  no  one  be  in  fault,  that  the  English  and  Irish  Prelacies 
of  1826  did  not  foresee  the  possibility  of  the  Synodal  determina- 
tions of  1870,  nor  will  they  wonder  that  Statesmen  should  feel 
Hieiiselves  aggrieved,  that  stipulations,  which  they  considered 
necessary  for  Catholic  emancipation,  should  have  been,  as  they 
may  think,  rudely  cast  to  the  winds. 

And  now  I  mutt  pass  from  the  mere  accidents  of  the  contro- 
versy  to  its  essential  points,  and  1  can  not  trea|  them  to  the  sat- 
isfaction of  Mr.  Qladstone,  unless  I  go  back  a  peat  way,  and  be 
allowed  to  speak  of  the  ancient  Catholic  Chnron. 

{2.  The  Axcient  Church. 

When  Mr.  Gladstone  accuses  us  of  "  repudiating  ancient  his- 
toiy,"  he  means  the  ancient  history  of  the  Church ;  also,  I  under- 
slimil  him  to  be  viewing  that  history  under  a  particular  aspect. 
There  are  many  aspects  in  which  Christianity  presents  itself  to 
ns;  for  instance,  the  aspect  of  social  usefulness,  or  of  devotion, 
or  again  of  theology ;  but,  though  he  in  one  place  glances  at  the 
last  of  these  aspects,  his  own  view  of  it  is  its  relation  towards 
the  civil  power.  He  writes  "  as  one  of  the  world  at  lar^e ;  *'  as  a 
*•  layman  who  has  spent  most  and  the  best  years  of  his  life  in  the 
observation  and  practice  of  politics ; "  p.  7,  and,  as  a  statesman, 
he  naturally  looks  at  the  Church  on  its  political  side.  Accordingly, 
in  his  title-page,  in  which  he  professes  to  be  expostulating  with 
OS  for  accepting  the  Vatican  Decrees,  he  does  so,  not  for  any  rea- 
son whatever,  but  because  of  their  incompatibility  with  our  civil 
allegiance.  This  is  the  key-note  of  his  impeachment  of  us.  As 
II  mnolic  man,  he  has  only  to  do  with  the  public  action  and  effect 
Of  our  Religion,  its  aspect  upon  national  affairs,  on  our  civil 
duties,  on  our  foreign  interests;  and  he  tells  us  that  our  Religion 
has  a  bearing  and  behavior  towards  the  State  utterly  unlike  that 


of  ancient  Christianity,  so  unlike  that  we  wm.j  he  siud  to  repndi- 
ate  what  Christianity  was  in  its  first  centuries,  so  unlike  to  what 
it  was  then,  that  we  have  actually  forfeited  the  preud  boast  of 
being  "Ever  one  and  the  same;  '^unlike,  I  say,  in  this,  that  our 
action  is  so  antagonistic  to  the  State's  action,  and  our  claims  so 
menacing  to  civil  peace  and  prosperity.  Indeed!  then  I  suppose 
our  Lord  and  His  Apostles,  that  St.  Ignatius  of  Antioch,  and  St 
Polycarp  of  Smyrna,. and  St  Cyprian  of  Carthage,  and  St  Lau- 
rence or  Rome,  that  St  Alexander  and  St  Paul  of  Constantino- 
Sle,  that  St  Ambrose  of  Milan,  that  Popes  Leo,  John,  Sylverian, 
Gregory,  and  Martin,  all  members  of  the  "undivided  Church," 
cared  supremely,  and  labored  successfully,  to  cultivate  peaceful 
relations  with  the  government  of  Rome.  They  had  no  doctrines 
and  precepts,  no  rules  of  life,  no  isolation  and  aggressiveness, 
whicn  caused  them  to  be  considered,  in  spite  of  themselves,  the 
enemies  of  the  human  race!  May  I  not,  without  disrespect,  sub- 
mit to  Mr.  Gladstone  that  this  is  very  paradoxical?  Surely  it  is 
our  fidelity  to  the  history  of  our  forefathers,  and  not  its  repudia- 
tion, whicn  Mr.  Gladstone  dislikes  in  us.  When,  indeed,  was  it 
in  ancient  times  that  the  State  did  not  show  iealously  of  the 
Church  ?  Was  it  when  Decius  and  Dioclesian  slaughtered  their 
thousands  who  had  abjured  the  religion  of  old  Rome?  or,  was  it 
when  Athanasius  was  banished  to  Treves  ?  or  when  Basil,  on  the 
Imperial  Prefect's  crying  out,  "Never  before  did  any  man  make 
so  free  with  me,"  answered,  "Perhaps  you  never  before  fell  in 
with  a  Bishop?"  or  when  Chrysostom  was  sent  off  to  Cuousus,  to 
be  worried  to  death  by  an  Empress  ?  Go  through  the  long  annals 
of  Church  History,  century  after  century,  and  say,  was  there  ever 
a  time  when  her  Bishops,  and  notably  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  were 
slow  to  give  their  testimony  in  behalf  of  the  moral  and  revealed 
law  and  to  suffer  for  their  obedience  to  it,  or  forgot  that  they  had 
a  message  to  deliver  to  the  world  ?  not  the  task  merely  of  admin- 
istering spiritual  consolation,  or  of  making  the  sick-bed  easy,  or 
of  training  up  good  members  of  society,  and  of  "  serving  tables," 
(though  all  this  was  included  in  their  range  of  duty) ;  but  specially 
and  directly  to  deliver  a  message  to  the  world,  a  definite  message 
to  high  and  low,  from  the  world's  Maker,  whether  men  would 
hear  or  whether  tibey  would  forbear?  The  history  surely  of 
the  Church  in  all  past  times,  ancient  as  well  as  medieval,  is  the 
▼err  embodiment  of  that  tradition  of  Apostolical  independence 
and  freedom  of  speech  which  in  the  eyes  of  man  is  ner  great 
offense  now. 

Nay,  that  independence,  I  may  iay,  is  even  one  of  her  notes 
or  credentials;  for  where  shall  we  find  it  except  in  the  Catholic 
Church ?  "I  spoke  of  Thy  testimonies,"  says  the  Psalmist  "  even 
before  kings,  and  I  was  not  ashamed."  This  verse,  I  think  Dr. 
Arnold  used  to  say,  rose  up  in  judgment  against  the  Anglican 
Chm-ch,  in  spite  of  its  real  excellences.  As  to  the  Oriental 
Churches,  every  one  knows  in  what  bondage  they  lie,  whether 
they  are  under  the  rule  of  the  Czar  or  of  the  Sultan.  Such  is  the 
actual  fact  that,  whereas  it  is  the  very  mission  of  Christianity  to 
bear  witness  to  the  Creed  and  Ten  Commandments  in  a  world 
"5 


I 


so 


THl  AXOIRNT  CnVBUB* 


TUB  AXCIBNT  OHUROM. 


51 


whkk  ii  mmm  to  iien,  Ronio  it  now  the  one  fiuthful  repNMiit- 
sUft,  iad  tbereby  it  heir  mil  m»emmm  of  thai  froMpoken  daunt- 
Itote  Charoh  of  old,  whott  liaditioiit  Mr.  Oladitono  taja  the  said 
Borne  has  repudiated. 

I  hare  one  thing  more  to  say  on  the  subject  of  the  "  semper 
eadem."  In  Imth,  this  fidelity  to  the  ancient  Christian  sjstem, 
tew  in  modem  Rome,  was  the  Imninoiis  fact  which  more  than 
any  other  turned  men's  minds  at  Oiford  forty  years  ago  to  look 
towards  her  with  reverence,  intorett,  and  love.  It  afi'ectod  indi* 
vidafel  minds  Tariously,  of  course;  some  it  even  brought  on 
evenlwiUy  to  oonversion,  others  ii  only  restrained  from  active  op- 
position to  her  claims;  but  no  one  could  read  the  Fathers,  and 
determine  to  be  their  disoiple,  without  feeling  that  Borne,  like  a 
faithful  stoward,  had  kept  in  fullness  and  in  vigor  what  his  own 
communion  had  let  drop.  The  Tracts  for  the  Times  were  founded 
on  a  deadly  antagonism  to  what  in  these  last  centuries  has  been 
ealled  Erastianism  or  Ciesarism.  Their  writers  considered  the 
€huroh  to  be  a  divine  creation,  "  not  of  men,  neither  by  man,  but 
by  Jesus  Christ,"  the  Ark  of  Halvation,  the  Oracle  of  Truth,  the ' 
llride  of  Christ,  with  a  message  to  aU  men  every^where,  and  a 
eUn  on  their  love  and  obedience ;  and,  in  relation  to  the  civil 

r)wer,  the  object  of  that  promise  of  the  Jewish  prophets,  "  fiehold, 
will  lift  up  Mv  Hand  to  the  Gentiles,  and  will  set  up  My  stand- 
ard to  the  iMMples ;  kings  and  their  queens  shall  bow  down  to  thee 
with  their  face  toward  the  earth,  and  they  shall  lick  up  the  dust 
of  thy  feet."  No  Ultramontane  (so  called)  could  go  beyond  those 
Wfiwrs  in  the  account  which  thev  gave  of  her  from  the  Prophets, 
and  that  hkh  notion  is  recorded  beyond  mistake  in  a  thousand 
'pataagea  of  their  writings. 

There  is  a  fine  passage  of  Mr  Keble's  in  the  British  Critic,  in 
animadversion  upon  a  oontemporary  reviewer  Mr.  Hurrell 
Froude,  speaking  of  the  Church  of  Sngknd,  had  said  that  "  she 
was  'united'  to  the  State  as  Israel  to  Egypt."  This  shocked  the 
reviewer  in  Question,  who  exclaimed  in  consequence,  "  The  Church 
is  net  nnitea  to  the  State  as  Israel  to  Egypt ;  it  is  united  as  a  be- 
lievin||  ipiftf  to  a  husband  who  threaten di  to  apostatize;  and  as  a 
Chrislian  wife  so  pkced  would  act  .  .  clinging  to  the  connection 
.  .  so  the  Church  must  struggle  even  now,  and  save,  not  hersif, 
but  the  State,  from  the  crime  of  a  divorce."  On  this  Mr.  Reble 
tm,  **  We  had  thought  that  the  Spouse  of  the  Church  was  a  very 
diibrenl  Person  from  any  or  all  States,  and  her  relation  to  the 
State  Hwungh  Him  very  unlike  that  of  hers^  whose  duties  are 
'  ftp  in '  hm,  service,  eherishina^  and  obedience.*    And 


liMe  the  one  is  exclusively  of  this  world,  the  other  essentially  of 
iw  iiinial  world,  smh^n  AUianee  as  the  above  sentence  de- 
■eribet,  would  have  seemed  to  us,  not  only  fatal,  but  wtrnt 

tiPMil"*    And  he  quotes  the  lines, — 

"Mortna  quinetmm  jungebat  corpora  vivis, 
Cotnponens  nianibuaque  manus,  atque  oribus  ora: 
Tormenti  genua*' 

•Kevlew  of  Gladstone's  *The  State  In  its  Belations  with  the 
Church,'  October,  1839. 


It  was  this  same  conviction  that  the  Church  had  rishte  which 
the  State  could  not  touch,  and  wbs  prone  to  ignore,  ana  which  in 
consequence  were  the  occasion  of  great  troubles  between  the  two, 
that  led  Mr.  Froude  at  the  beginning  of  the  movement  to  translate 
the  letters  of  Sfc.  Thomas  Bscket,  and  Mr.  Bowden  to  write  the 
Life  of  Hildebrand.  As  to  myself,  I  will  but  refer,  as  to  one  out 
of  many  passages  with  the  same  drift,  in  the  books  and  tracts 
which  I  published  at  that  time,  to  my  Whit-Monday  and  Whit- 
Tuesday  Sermons. 

I  believe  a  large  number  of  members  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land at  this  time  are  faithful  to  the  doctrine  which  was  proclaimed 
within  ite  pale  in  18^,  and  following  years ;  the  main  difference 
between  them  and  Catholics  being,  not  as  to  the  existence  of  cer- 
tain high  prerogatives  and  spiritual  powers  in  the  Christian  Church, 
but  that  the  powers  which  we  give  ta  the  Holy  See,  they  lodge  in 
her  Bishop  and  Priests,  whether  as  i^  body  or  individually.  Of 
course,  this  is  a  very  important  difference,  but  it  does  not  enter 
into  my  argument  here.  It  does  seem  to  me  prei>osterous  to 
charge  the  Catholic  Church  of  to^ay  with  repudiating  ancient 
history  by  certain  political  acts  of  hers,  and  thereby  losing  her 
identity,  when  it  was  her  very  likeness  in  political  action  to  the 
Church  of  the  first  centuries,  that  has  in  our  time  attracted  even 
t3  her  communion,  or  at  least  to  her  teaching,  not  a  few  educated 
men,  who  made  those  first  centuries  their  special  model 

But  1  have  more  to  say  on  this  subject,  perhaps  too  much,  when 
I  go  on,  as  I  now  do,  to  contemplate  the  Christian  Church,  when 
persecution  was  exchanged  for  establishment,  and  her  enemies 
necame  her  children.  As  she  resisted  and  defied  her  persecutors, 
BO  she  ruled  her  convert  people.  And  surely  this  was  but  natu- 
ral, and  will  startle  those  only  to  whom  the  subject  is  new.  If 
the  Church  is  independent  of  the  State,  so  far  as  she  is  a  messen- 
ger from  God,  therefore,  should  the  State,  with  its  high  officials 
and  its  subject  masses,  come  into  her  communion,  it  is  plain  that 
they  must  at  once  change  hostility  into  submission.  There  was 
no  middle  term;  either  they  must  deny  her  claim  to  divinity  or 
humble  themselves  before  it, — that  is,  as  far  as  the  domain  of  re- 
ligion extends,  and  that  domain  is  a  wide  one.  They  could  not 
place  God  and  man  on  one  level.  We  see  this  principle  carried 
out  among  ourselves  in  all  sects  every  day,  though  with  greater 
or  less  exactness  of  application,  according  to  the  supernatural 
power  which  they  ascribe  to  their  ministers  or  clergy.  It  is  a 
sentiment  of  nature,  which  anticipates  the  inspirea  command, 
"  Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you,  and  submit  yourselves, 
ibr  they  wateh  for  your  souls." 

As  re^rds  the  Boman  Emperors,  immediately  on  their  becom- 
ing Christians,  their  exaltation  of  the  hierarchy  was  in  propor- 
tion to  ite  abject  condition  in  the  heathen  period.  ^  Grateful  con- 
verts felt  that  they  could  not  do  too  much  in  its  honor  and 
service.  Emperors  bowed  the  head  before  the  Bishops,  kissed 
their  hands  and  asked  their  blessing.  When  Constantine 
entered  into  the  presence  of  the  assembled  Prelates  at  Nicaea, 
his  eyes  fell,  the  color  mounted  up  into  his  check,  and  his  mien 


iif 


S3 


THE  AXCIEXT  CHURCH. 


THX  PAPAL  CHURCH. 


53 


wMiiiat  of  a  suppliant;  he  wotiM  not  sit  till  tlie  Bithope  bade 
him,  and  he  kiseecl  the  wowndi  of  the  CJanfeeeors.  He  aet  tiie  •«- 
ample  for  the  Buoceeeofs  of  his  power,  nor  did  the  Bishops  de- 
elifie  sneh  honors.  Emprors*  wives  served  them  at  table,  when 
thej  did  wronft,  they  did  penance  and  asked  forgiveness.  When 
Ihij  quarreled  with  them,  and  would  banish  them,  their  hand 
iwinWed  when  they  came  to  sign  the  order,  and  refused  to  do  its 
ollce,  and  alter  various  attempts  they  gave  up  their  purpose, 
goldiers  raised  to  sovereignty  asked  their  recognition  and  were 
leftesed  it.  Cities  under  imperial  displeasure  sought  their  inter- 
vention, and  the  master  of  thirty  legions  found  himself  power- 
less to  withstand  the  feeblft  voice  of  some  aged  Iravel-stained 

Laws  were  passed  in  favor  of  the  Church ;  Bishopa  could  only 
bo  Judged  by  Bishops,  and  the  causes  of  their  clergy  were  with- 
^mwn  mm  the  secular  courts.  Their  sentence  was  inal,  as  if 
it  were  the  Emperor's  own,  and  the  governors  of  provinces  were 
bound  to  put  it  in  execution.  Litigants  every-where  were 
allowed  the  liberty  of  referring  their  cause  to  the  tribunal  of  the 
Bishops,  who,  besides,  became  arbitrators  on  a  large  scale  in  pri- 
vate quarrels;  and  the  public,  even  heathens,  wished  it  so.  8t 
Ambrose  was  sometimes  so  taken  up  with  business  of  this  sort, 
that  he  had  time  for  nothing  else.  8t  Austin  and  Theodoret  both 
complain  of  the  weight  of  such  secular  engagements,  as  forced  upon 
them  by  the  importunity  of  the  people.  Nor  was  this  all ;  the 
Emperors  showed  their  belief  in  the  divinity  of  the  Church  and 
of  its  creed  by  acts  of  what  we  should  now  call  persecution. 
Jews  were  forbidden  to  proselytize  a  Christian;  Christians  were 
fml>idden  to  become  pi^ns;  pagan  ritee  were  abolished,  the 
books  of  heretics  and  inidels  were  burned  wholesale;  their 
ehapb  were  raicd  to  the  ground,  and  even  their  private  meet- 
ings were  made  illegal.  ^ 

These  eharacteristics  of  the  convert  Empire  were  vm  mme- 
iiate,  some  of  ^em  the  logical,  consequences,  of  its  new  faith. 
Bad  not  the  Emperors  honored  Christianity  in  its  ministers  and 
in  its  precepts,  they  would  not  properly  have  deserved  the  name 
of  converts.  Nor  was  it  unreasonable  in  litigants  voluntarily  to 
frequent  tiie  episcopal  tribunals,  if  they  got  justice  done  to  them 
there  better  than  in  the  civil  courts.  As  to  the  prohibition  of 
heretieal  meetings,  1  can  not  eet  myself  quite  to  believe  that 
iPagans,  Marclonites,  and  Manicnees  had  much  tenderness  of  con- 
science in  ther  religions  profession,  or  were  wounded  seriously 
by  the  Imperial  rescript  to  their  disadvantage.  Many  of  these 
■eeti  were  of  a  most  immoral  character,  whether  in  doctrine  or 
practice;  others  were  formj  of  witoherall;  often  they  were  little 
better  than  paganism.  The  Novatians  certainly  stand  on  higher 
ground;  but  on  the  whole,  it  would  be  meet  unjust  to  elass  such 
wild,  impure,  inhuman  rites  with  even  the  most  eitravagaiit  and 
grotesque  of  American  sectaries  now.  They  could  entertain  no 
litter  feeling  that  injustice  was  done  them  in  their  repression. 
They  did  not  make  free  thought  orprivate  judgment  their  waloli- 
words.    The  populations  of  the  Empire  did  not  riii  in  pefoH 


when  its  religion  was  changed.  There  were  two  broad  conditions 
which  accompanied  the  grant  of  all  this  ecclesiastical  power  and 
privilege,  and  made  the  exercise  of  it  possible;  first,  that  the  peo- 
ple consented  to  it,  secondly,  that  it  was  enforced  by  the  law  of 
the  Empire.  High  and  low  opened  the  door  to  it.  The  Church 
of  course  would  say  that  such  prerogatives  were  rightfully  hers, 
as  being  at  least  congruous  grants  made  to  her,  on  the  part  of 
the  State,  in  return  for  the  benefits  which  she  bestowed  upon  it. 
It  was  her  right  to  demand  them,  and  the  State's  duty  to  concede 
them.  This  seems  to  have  been  the  basis  of  the  new  state  of 
society.  And  in  fact  these  prerogatives  were  in  force  and  in  ex- 
ercise all  through  those  troublous  ccnturiAS  which  followed  the 
break-up  of  the  Imperial  sway :  and,  though  the  handling  of 
them  at  length  fell  into  the  hands  of  one  See  exclusively  (on 
which  I  shaU  remark  presently),  the  See  of  Peter,  yet  the  sub- 
stance and  character  of  these  prerogatives,  and  the  Church's 
claim  to  possess  them,  remained  untouched.  The  change  in  tlie 
Internal  allocation  of  power  did  not  affect  the  existence  and  the 
use  of  the  power  itself 

Ranke,  speaking  of  this  development  of  ecclesiastical  suprem- 
acy upon  the  conversion  of  the  Empire,  remarks  as  follows : 

"  It  appears  to  me  that  this  was  the  result  of  an  internal  ne- 
cessity. The  rise  of  Christianity  involved  the  liberation  of  re- 
lieion  from  aJl  political  elements.  From  this  followed  the  growth 
of  a  distinct  ecclesiastical  class  with  a  peculiar  constitution.  In 
this  separation  of  the  Church  from  the  State  consists,  perhaps, 
the  greatest,  the  most  pervading  and  influential  peculiarity  of  all 
Christian  times.  The  spiritusl  and  secular  powers  may  come 
into  near  contact,  may  even  stand  in  the  closest  community ;  but 
they  can  be  thorougnly  incorporated  only  at  rare  conjunctures 
and  for  a  short  period.  Their  mutual  relations,  their  position 
with  regard  to  each  other,  form,  from  this  time'  forward,  one  of 
the  most  important  considerations  in  all  history." — The  Popes ^ 
ToL  i.,  p.  10,  Transl. 

» 

83.  Thb  Papal  Church. 

Now  we  come  to  the  distinctive  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  Re- 
ligion, the  doctrine  which  separates  us  from  all  other  denomina- 
tions of  Christians,  however  near  they  may  approach  to  us  in 
other  respects,  the  claims  of  the  See  of  Rome,  which  have  given 
occasion  to  Mr.  Gladstone's  Pamphlet  and  to  the  remarks  which 
I  am  now  making  upon  ii  Of  those  rights,  prerogatives,  privi- 
leges, and  duties,  wnich  I  liave  been  surveying  in  the  ancient 
Church,  the  Pope  is  the  heir.  I  shaU  dwell  now  upon  this  point 
as  far  as  it  is  to  my  purpose  to  do  so,  not  treating  it  theologically 
(else  I  must  define  and  prove  from  Scripture  and  the  Fathers 
the  "  Primatus  jure  divino  Romani  Pontificis"),  but  historically, 
because  Mr.  Gladstone  appeals  to  history.  Instead  of  treating  it 
theologically  I  wish  to  look  with  (as  it  were)  secular,  or  even  non- 
Cathouc  eyes  at  the  powers  claimed  daring  the  last  thousand 
years  by  the  Pope— that  is,  only  as  they  lie  in  the  nature  of  the 


54 


TBB  PAPAL  CHURCH. 


Mte,  ind  in  tlie  surflioe  of  the  hcfa  wliich  come  before  m  ii  iis- 

1.  I  say,  then,  the  Pope  is  the  heir  of  the  Ecumenical  Hicp- 
iyrchy  of  the  fourth  century,  as  beio^,  what  I  may  call,  heir  by 
iefauli  No  one  else  claims  or  exercises  its  rights  or  its  duties. 
It  it  poesihle  to  consider  the  Patriarch  of  Moscow  or  of  Constan- 
tinople, heir  to  the  historical  pretensions  of  St.  Ambrose  or  St. 
Martin  t  Does  any  Anglican  Bishop  for  the  last  300  years  recall 
to  our  minds  the  ima^e  of  St.  Basil  ?  Well,  then,  has  all  that  eo- 
islesiistical  power,  which  makes  such  a  show  in  the  Christian  Em- 
tti»,  simply  fanished,  or,  if  not,  where  is  it  to  be  found  7  I  wish 
Protestants  would  throw  themselves  into  onr  minds  upon  this 
point;  I  am  not  holding  an  argument  with  them ;  I  am  only  wish- 
ing them  to  understand  where  we  stand  and  how  we  uyok  at 
iiiingi.  There  is  this  great  diflbrence  of  belief  between  us  and 
them;  they  do  not  believe  that  Christ  set  up  a  visible  society,  or 
I  isther  kingdom,  for  the  propagation  and  maintenance  of  His  re- 
^ligion,  for  a  necessaij  home  and  refuge  of  His  peoj)le ;  but  we 
do.  We  know  the  kingdom  is  still  on  earth :  where  is  it  ?  If  all 
that  mm  found  of  it  is  what  can  be  discerned  at  Constantinople 
or  Cbaterbury,  I  say,  it  has  disappeared ;  and  either  there  was  a 
ladieal  cormption  of  Christiani^  from  the  first,  or  Christianitr 
eame  to  an  end,  in  proportion  as  the  type  of  the  Nicene  Church 
lUM  out  of  the  world :  for  all  that  we  know  of  Cliristianity,  in 
aneienl  history,  aa  a  concrete  fiiot,  is  the  Church  of  Athanasius 
and  his  fellows:  it  is  nothing  else  historically  but  that  bundle  of 
phenomena,  that  combination  of  claims:  prerogatives,  and  corre- 
sponding  acts,  some  of  which  I  have  recounted  above.  There  is 
no  help  for  it;  we  can  not  take  as  much  as  we  please,  and  no 
more,  of  an  institution  which  has  a  monadic  existence.  We  must 
either  give  up  the  belief  in  the  Church  as  a  divine  institution  al- 
together, or  we  must  recognise  it  in  that  communion  of  which 
the  Pope  is  the  head.  With  him  alone  and  round  about  him  are 
found  the  claims,  the  prerogatives,  and  duties  which  we  identify 
with  the  kingdom  set  up  bv  Chriiii  We  must  take  things  as  they^ 
are ;  to  believe  in  a  Church,  is  to  believe  in  the  Pope.  And  thus 
this  belief  in  the  Pope  and  his  attributes,  which  seems  so  mon- 
strous to  Pirotestants,  is  bound  np  with  our  being  Catholics  at  aU; 
as  our  Catholicism  is  with  our  Christianity.  There  is  nothing, 
then,  of  wanton  opposition  to  the  powers  that  be,  no  dinning  of 
novelties  in  their  startled  ears  in  what  is  often  unjustly  oalled  Ul- 
tramontane doctrine ;  there  is  no  pernicious  servility  to  the  Pope 
in  mt  admission  of  his  pretensions.  I  say,  we  can  not  help  our- 
selves— Parliament  maT  deal  as  harshly  with  us  as  it  will ;  we 
should  not  believe  in  the  Church  at  all,  unless  we  believed  in  its 
visible  head. 

So  it  is;  the  course  of  ages  has  fulfilled  the  propheor  and 
promise :  "  Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  My 
Church ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound 
in  heaven ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth,  shall  be 
loosed  in  heaven.'*  That  which  in  substance  was  possessed  by 
the  Nicene  Hierarchy,  that  the  Pope  claims  now.    Ido  not  wish 


Vm  PAPAL  CHUBOH. 


55 


to  pnt  difficulties  in  «▼  way;  but  I  can  not  conceal  or  smo*)th 
over  what  I  believe  to  be  a  simple  truth,  though  the  avowal  of 
it  will  be  very  unwelcome  to  Protestants,  and,  as  I  fear,  to  some 
Catholics.      However,  I  do  not  call  upon  another  to  believe  all 
that  I  believe  on  the  subject  myself.    I  declare  it,  as  my  own 
judgment,  that  the  prerogatives,  such  as,  and,   in  the  way  in 
which,  I  have  described  toem  in  substance,  which  the  Church 
had  under  the  Roman  Power,  those  she  claims  now,  and  never, 
never  will  relinquish ;  claims  them,  not  as  having  received  them 
from  a  dead  Empire,  but  partly  by  the  direct  endowment  of  her 
Divine  Master,  and  partly  as  being  a  legitimate  outeome  of  that^ 
endowment;  claims  them,  but  not  except  from  Catholic  popula- 
tions, not  as  if  accounting  the  more  sublime  of  them  to  be  of  / 
every-day  use,  but  holding  them  as  a  protection  or  remedy  in  \ 
great  emergencies  or  on  supreme  occasions,  when  nothing  else 
will  serve,  as  extraordinary  and  solemn  acts  of  her  religious  sov- 
ereignty.   And  our  Lord,  seeing  what  would  be  brought  about 
by  human  means,  even  had  He  not  willed  it,  and  recognizing, 
from  the  laws  which  He  Himself  had  imposed  upon  human  so- 
ciety, that  no  large  community   could  be  strong  which  had  no 
head,   spoke   the   word  in  the  beginning  as  he  did  to  Judah, 
**  Thou  art  he  whom  thy  brethren  shall  praise,"  and  then  left  it 
to  the  course  of  events  to  fulfill  it. 

2.  Mr.  Gladstone  ought  to  have  chosen  another  issue  for  attack 
upon  us,  than  the  Pope's  power.  His  real  difficulty  lies  deeper; 
as  little  permission  as  he  allows  to  the  Pope,  would  he  allow  to 
any  ecclesiastic  who  would  wield  the  weapons  of  St.  Ambrose 
and  St.  Augustine.  That  concentration  of  the  Church's  powers 
which  history  brings  before  us  should  not  be  the  object  of  his 
special  indignation.  It  is  not  the  existence  of  a  Pope,  but  of  a 
CTiurch,  which  is  his  aversion.  It  is  the  powers,  and  not  their 
distribution  and  allocation  in  the  ecclesiastical  body  which  he 
writes  against  A  triangle  or  parallelogram  is  the  same  in  its 
substance  and  nature,  whichever  side  is  made  its  base.  "The 
Pontiffs,"  says  Mr.  Bowden,  who  writes  as  an  Anglican,  "exalted 
to  the  kingly  throne  of  St.  Peter,  did  not  so  much  claim  new 
privileges  for  themselves,  as  deprive  their  episcopal  brethren  of 
privileges  originally  common  to  the  hierarchy.  Even  the  titles  by 
which  those  autocratical  prelates,  in  the  plentitude  of  their 
power,  delighted  to  style  themselves,  *  Summus  Sacerdos,*  *  Ponti- 
fexMaximus,'  'Vioarius  Christi,'  'Papa'  itself,  had,  nearer  to  the 
primitive  times,  been  the  honorable  appellations  of  every  Bishop ; 
as  'Sedes  Apostolica'  had  been  the  description  ©f  every 
Bishop's  throne.  The  ascription  of  these  titles,  therefore,  to  the 
Pope  only  gave  to  the  terms  new  force,  because  that  ascription 
became  exclusive ;  because,  that  is,  the  bishops  in  general  were 
stripped  of  honors,  to  which  their  claims  were  as  well  founded 
as  tnose  of  their  Roman  brother,  who  became,  hj  the  change,  not 
so  strictly  universal  as  sole  Bishop."     (Greg,  vii.,  vol.  i.,  p.  64.) 

Say  that  the  Christian  polity  remained,  as  history  represents  it 
to  us  in  the  fourth  century,  or  that  now  it  was,  if  that  was  pos- 
sible, to  revert  to  such  a  state,  would  politicians  have  less  trouble 


mi  FAPJUi  OBITBOII. 

villi  1,800  eentera  of  power  than  they  h«Te  witli  oneT  Instead 
of  on©,  with  traditionary  rules,  the  trammels  of  treaties  and  en- 
g^ipiioals,  public  opinion  to  consult  and  manage,  the  responsi* 
toiity  of  great  interests,  and  the  |?uarantce  for  his  behavior  m  his 
temporal  possessions,  there  would  be  a  legion  of  ecclesiastics, 
emA  bishop  with  his  following,  each  independent  of  the  others, 
each  with  liis  own  viewi*  weh  with  extraordinary  powers,  each 
with  the  risk  of  misvaing  them,  mil  OTcr  Christendom.  It  wouM 
lie  the  Aiigliean  theory  made  real.  It  would  be  an  ecclesiastical 
eomniuiitin ;  and.  if  it  did  not  benefit  religion,  at  least  it  would 
not  benefit  the  civil  power.  Take  a  small  illustration:— what  in- 
termption  at  this  time  to  Parliamentary  proceedings,  does  a  small 
mIous  party  occasion,  which  its  enemies  call  a  "  mere  handful 
©f  clerey ; "  and  why?  Because  its  members  are  responsible  for 
what  they  do  to  God  alone  and  to  their  conscience  as  His  voice. 
Iffifen  suppose  it  was  only  her©  or  there  that  episcopal  autonomy 
was  vigorous;  yet  oonsider  what  zeal  it*  kindled  by  local  interest! 
and  national  spirit.  One  John  of  Tuam,  with  a  Pope's  full  apoe- 
iiili©  powers,  would  be  a  greater  trial  to  successive  ministries  than 
ftn  Ecumenical  Bishop  at  Kome.  Parliament  understands  this 
well,  for  it  exclaims  against  the  Sictrdota]  principle.  Here,  for 
A  second  reason,  if  our  Divine  Master  has  given  those  great 
powers  to  the  Church,  which  aneient  Christianity  testifies,  we 
■ee  whv  His  Providence  has  also  provided  that  the  exercise  of 
iiieiii  should  be  concentrated  in  one  Bee. 

^lfat»  anyhow,  the  progress  of  concentration  was  not  the  work 
of  the  Pope;  it  was  brought  about  by  the  changes  of  times  and 
the  vicissitudes  of  Nations.  It  was  not  his  fault  that  the  Van- 
dais  swept  away  the  Afriean  sees,  and  the  Saracens  those  of  Syria 
■mi  Asia  Minor,  or  that  Constantinople  and  its  dependencies  be- 
aime  the  creatures  of  Imperialism,  or  that  France,  England,  and 
doriiany  would  obey  none  but  the  author  of  their  own  Chris- 
tlaiilty,  or  that  clergy  and  people  at  a  distance  were  obstinate  in 
■lieltering  themselves  under  the  im^csty  of  Bome  against  their 
own  ieroe  kings  and  nobles  or  inperious  bishops,  even  to  the 
imposing  forgeries  on  the  world  and  on  the  Pope  in  justification 
of  their  proceedings.  All  this  will  be  fact,  whether  the  Popes 
-mm  ambitious  or  not;  and  still  it  will  be  fact  that  the  issue  of 
Mmt  great  chaipe  was  m  great  benefit  to  the  whole  of  Europe. 
Mo  one  but  a  llister,  who  was  a  thousand  bishope  in  himself  al 
OBe©,  could  hatfi  tuned  and  controlled,  as  the  Pope  did,  the  great 
and  little  t/raiite  of  the  middle  age. 

3.  This  IS  generally  confessed  now,  even  by  Protestant  histor- 
ians, vii.,  that  the  concentration  of  ecclesiastical  power  in  those 
eentiiriea  was  simply  necessary  for  the  civilization  of  Europe. 
gi  w»rie  It  does  not  foHow  that  the  benefits  rendered  then  to  the 
Saronean  oommonwealth  by  the  political  sopremacy  of  the  Pope, 
would,  if  he  was  still  supreme,  be  rendered  in  time  to  come.  I 
have  no  wish  to  make  assumptions ;  yet  conclusions  short  of  this 
will  be  unfavorable  to  Mr.  Gladstone's  denunciation  of  him.    We 


leap  the  fruit  tt  this  day  of  his  services  in  the  past.    With  the 
iwfpoi©  of  allowing  this  I  make  a  rather  long  extract  from  Bean 


THS  FAPAL  CnOBCH. 


57 


Milman^s  "Latin  Christianity;"    he  is  speaking  of  the  era  of 
Gregory  I.,  and  he  says,  the  Papacy  "  was  the  only  power  which 
lay  not  entirely  and  absolutely  prostrate  before  the  disasters  of 
thi  times— a  power  which   had  an  inherent  strength,  and  might 
resume  it»  majesty.    It  was  this  power  which  was  most  imperar 
tively  required  to  preserve  all  which  was  to  survive  out  of  the 
crumbing  wreck   of  Roman  civilization.     To  Western  Chnsti- 
anitv  was  absolutely  necessary  a  center,  standing  alone,  strong  m 
traditionary  reverence,  and  in  acknowledged  claims  to  supremacy. 
Even  the  perfect  organization  of  the  Christian  hierarchy  might  in 
all  human  probability  have  fallen  to  pieces  m  perpetual  conflict: 
it  might  have  degenerated  into  a  half  secular  feudal  caste,  with 
hereditary  benefices  more  and  more  entirely  subservient  to  the 
civil  authority,  a  priesthood  of  each  nation  or  each  tribe,  grad- 
ually sinking  to  the  intellectual  or  religious  level  of  the  nation 
or  tribe.     On  the  rise  of  a  power  both  controUing  and  conservar 
tive  hung,  humanly  speaking,  the  life  and  death  of  Christiani^— 
of  Christianity  as  a  permanent,  aggressive,  expansive,  and,  to  a 
certain  extent,  uniform  system.     There  must  be  a  counterbalance 
to  barbaric  force,  to  the  unavoidable  anarchy  of  Teutonism,  with 
its  tribal,  or  at  the  utmost  national  independence,  forming  a  host 
of  small,  conflicting,  antagonistic  kingdoms.     All  Europe  wou^d 
have  been  what  England  was  under  the  Octarchy,  what  Germany 
was  when  her  emperors  were  weak ;  and  even  her  emperors  she 
owed  to  Rome,  to  the  Church,  to  Christianity     Providence  mi^ht 
have  otherwise  ordained ;  but  it  is  impossible  for  a  man  to  imagine 
by  what  other  organizing  or  consolidating  force  the  common- 
wealth of  the  Western  nations  could  have  grown  up  to  a  discord- 
ant,  indeed,  and  conflicting  league,  but  still  a  league,  with  that 
unity  and  conformity  of  manners,  usages,  laws,  religion,  which 
have   made  their  rivalries,  oppugnancies,  and  even  their  long 
ceaseless  wars,  on  the  whole  to  wsue  in  the  noblest,  highest,  most 
intellectual  form  of  civilization  known  to  ipan.     .     .     .     It  is 
impossible  to  conceive  what  had  been  the  confusion,  the  lawless- 
nessTthe  chaotic  state  of  the  middle  ages,  without  the  medieval 
Papacy;  and  of  the  medieval  Papacy  the  real  father  is  Gregory 
the  Great     In  all  his  predecessors  there  was  much  of  the  uncer- 
tainty and  indefiniteness  of  a  new  dominion     .     .     .     Gregory  10 
the  Roman  altogether  merged  in  the  Christian  Bishop.     It  la  » 
Christian  dominion,   of  which  he  lays  the  foundations  m   the 
Eternal  City,  not  the  old  Rome,  associating  ^'^^Jni^^  influence 
to  her  ancient  title  of  sovereignty."     (Vol.  i.,  p.  401,  2.) 

4.  From  Gregory  I.  to  Innocent  III.  is  six  hundred  years;—* 
very  fair  portion  of  the  world's  history,  to  have  passed  in  doing 
Rood  of  primary  importance  to  a  whole  continent,  and  that  the 
continent  of  Europe;  good,  by  which  all  nations  and  their  gov- 
ernors, all  statesmen  and  legislatures,  are  the  gamers.  Ana, 
acain  should  it  not  occur  to  Mr.  Gladstone  that  these  services 
were  rendered  to  mankind  by  means  of  those  very  instruments 
of  power  on  which  he  thinks  it  proper  to  pour  contempt  as  "  rusty 
tools?"  The  right  to  warn  and  punish  powerful  men,  to  «*«ffli-  |^ 
winioate  kinfii.  to  preach  aloud  truth  and  justice  to  the  inhabi- 


mi 


WM  PAPAL  OBUBCB. 


(  Imda  ofiSIm  Mffth,  to  denounce  immoral  doctrines,  to  strike  at  re- 
\  Mlioii  in  tlie  garb  of  heresy,  were  the  very  weafmns  br  which 
J  Europe  was  brought  into  a  civilized  condition ;  yet  he  calls  them 
*•  rusty  tools "  which  need  "refurbishing."     Does  he  wish,  then, 
lliftt  such  hi^h   expressions  of  ecclesiastical  displeasure,   such 
sharp  penalties,   should  bo  of  daily  use?     If  they  are   rusty, 
because  they  have  been  long  without  using,  then  have  they  ever 
been  rushr.    Is  a  Council  a  rusty  tool,  because  none  have  been 
ioM,  till  1870,  since  the  sixteenth  century  ?  or  because  there  had 
titon  but  nineteen  in  1,900  years?    How  many  times  is  it  in  the 
lilatory  of  Christianity  that  the  Pope  has  soIemnFf  drawn  and  ex- 
eroisiid  his  sword  upon  a  king  or  an  emperor  ?    If  an  extraordinary 
weapn  must  be  a  rusty  tool,  I  suppose  Gregory  Vil.'s  sword  was 
not  ketn  mough  for  the  German  Henry;   and  the  seventh  Pius, 
loo,  naei  •  msty  tool  in  his  excommunication  of  Napoleon.    How 
eonH  Mr.  Gladstone  ever  "  fondiv  think  that  Rome  had  disused  " 
her  weapons,  and  that  they  had  hung  up  as  antiquities  and  curi- 
osities in  her  celestial  armory, — or,  in  his  own  words,  as  "  hideous 
mummies,"  p.  46,— when  the  passage  of  arms  between  the  great 
Conqueror  and  the  aged  Pope  was  so  oloee  upon  his  memory  t 
Would  he  like  to  see  a  mummy  come  to  life  again  ?    That  unex- 
peeied  miracle  actually  took  place  in  the  first  years  of  this  cen- 
tury.   Gregory  was  oonsidered  to  have  done  an  astounding  deed 
in  the  middle  ages,  when  he  brought  Henry,  the  German  Bm- 
©eror,  to  do  penance  and  shiver  in  the  snows  at  Canossa ;    but 
Napolean  had  his  snow-penance  too,  and  that  with  an  actual  in?- 
terpoaition  of  Providence  in  the  infliction  of  ii    I  describe  it  in 
ihe  words  of  Alison : — 

•'•What  does  the  Pope  mean,'  said  Napoleon  to  Eugene,  in 
July,  1807,  '  by  the  threat  of  excommunicating  me  ?  does  he  think 
the  world  has  gone  back  a  thousand  years  ?  Does  he  suppose  the 
arms  will  fall  from  the  hands  of  my  soldiers?'  Within  two 
years  after  these  remarkable  words  were  written,  the  Pope  did 
ezoommunicate  him,  in  return  for  the  confiscation  of  his  whole 
imniiiionB,  and  in  less  than  four  years  more,  the  arms  did  fall 
firom  the  hands  of  his  soldiers ;  and  the  hosts,  apparently  invin- 
eible,  which  he  had  collected  were  dispersed  ana  ruined  by  the 
Uaili  of  winter.  '  The  weapons  of  the  soldiers,'  says  Segur,  in 
doscribing  the  Bnssian  retreat^  •appeared  of  an  insupportable 
weight  to  their  stifiened  arms.  During  their  frequent  falls  they 
fell  from  their  hands,  and  destitute  of  the  power  of  raising  them 
from  the  ground,  they  were  left  in  the  snow.  They  did  not  throw 
Hioni  away:  Ikmine  and  cold  tore  them  from  their  grasp.'  '  The 
soldiers  could  no  longer  hold  their  weapons,'  says  Salgues,  '  they 
fell  from  the  hands  even  of  the  bravest  and  most  robust.  The 
mekets  dropped  from  the  frozen  armi  of  those  who  bore  them.'  '* 
(Mist  ch.  Ix.,  9th  ed.) 

Alison  adds — "  There  is  something  in  these  marvelous  coinci- 
dences beyond  the  operations  of  chance,  and  which  even  a  Pro- 
t^tant  historian  feels  himself  bound  to  mark  for  the  observation 
of  future  a^es.  The  world  has  not  gone  back  a  thousand  years, 
but  that  Being  existed  with  whom  a  thousand  years  are  as  one 


THB  PAPAL  CHVItCH. 


50 


daT.  and  one  day  aa  a  tJiousand  years.'  As  He  wm  with  Greg- 
ory in  1077,  so  He  was  with  Pius  in  1812,  and  He  will  be  with 
some  future  Pope  again,  when  the  necessity  shall  come. 

5.  In  saying  this,  I  am  far  from  saying  that  Popes  are  never  m 
the  wrong,  and  are  never  to  be  resisted,  or  that  their  excommuni- 
cations always  avail.  I  am  not  bound  to  defend  the  policy  or 
the  acts  of  particular  Popes,  whether  before  or  after  the  great 
revolt  from  ttieir  authority  in  the  16th  century.  There  is  no  rea- 
son  that  I  should  contend,  and  I  do  not  contend,  for  instance, 
that  they  at  all  times  have  understood  our  own  people,  our  nar 
tional  character  and  resources,  and  our  position  m  li^urope;  or 
that  they  have  never  suffered  from  bad  counselors  or  misintor- 
mation.  I  say  this  the  more  freely,  because  UrbanVIII.,  about 
the  year  1641  or  1642,  blamed  the  policy  of  some  Popes  of  tho 
preceding  century  in  their  dealings  with  our  countinr.* 

But,  whatever  we  are  bound  to  allow  to  Mr.  Gladstone  on  this 
head,  that  does  not  warrant  the  passionate  invective  against  the 
Holy  See  and  us  individually,  which  he  has  earned  on  through 
sixty-four  pages.     What  we  have  a  manifest  right  to  expect  from 
him  is  lawyer-like  exactness  and  logical  consecutiveness  m  his 
impeachment  of  us.    The  heavier  that  is,  the  less  does  it  need  the 
exa^erations  of  a  great  orator.     If  the  Pope  s  conduct  toward  us 
thre?  centuries  ago  has  righteously  wiped  out  the  memory  of  hia 
earlier  benefits,  yet  he  should  have  a  fair  trial.     The  ""ore  intoxi- 
cating was  his  solitary  greatness,  when  it  was  m  the  zenith,  tlie 
creator  consideration  should  be  shovm  towards  him  m  his  present 
temporal  humiliation,  when  concentration  of  ecclesiastical  tunc- 
tions  in  one  man,  does  but  make  him,  in  the  presence  of  thQ 
haters  of  Catholicism,  what  a  Roman  Emperor  contemplated,  when 
he  wished  all  his  subjects  had  but  one  neck  that  he  might  destroy 
them  by  one  blow.     Surely,  in  the  trial  of  so  august  a  criminal, 
one  might  have  hoped,  at  least,  to  have  found  gravity  and  measure 
in  language,  and  calmness  in  tone— not  a  pamphlet  written  as  it 
on  impulse,  in  defense  of  an  incidental  parenthesis  m  a  previous 
publication,  and   then,  after  having  been  multiplied  in   J-2,UW 
copies,  appealing  to  the  lower  classes  in  the  shape  of  a  sixpenny 
tract,  the  lowness  of  the  price  indicating  the  width  of  the  circuja- 
tion.     Surely  Nana  Sahib  will  have  more  justice  done  to  him  by 
the  English  people,  than  has  been  shown  to  the  Father  of  European 

civilization.  ,  .       , .  i   .t.    rr  i- 

6. 1  have  been  referring  to  the  desolate  state  m  which  ttie  Holy 

See  has  been  cast  during  the  last  years,  such  that  the  Pope,  hu- 

•  "When  he  was  urged  to  excommunicate  the  Kings  of  France 
and  Sweden,  he  made  answer,  'We  may  declare  them  excomrauni- 
CRte,  as  Pius  V.  declared  Queen  Elizabeth  of  England,  and  before  hun 
Clement  VII.  the  King  of  England,  Hf  "^y  VIII.  •  •  }>^J  ^  J^ 
what  success?  The  whole  world  can  tell.  We  /«*  ^^»^^lVCf 
tears  of  blood.  Wisdom  does  not  teach  us  to  imitate  Pius  V.  or  Clem- 
ent VIL,  but  Paul  V.  who,  in  the  beginning,  being  many  times  ur^ 
by  the  Spaniards  to  excommunicate  James  King  oj  Eng'?^^  "®J^ 
would  consent  to  it' "  (State  Paper  office  Italy,  ^^l^^^^m 
Mr.  Simpson's  very  able  and  careful  hfe  of  Campion,  18W,  p.  *<a- 


60 


THB  PAPAL  OBVltOH. 


MMilj  wpmimg,  11  St  the  meroy  of  Mm  emiidm,  and  mordlT  « 

pmoDer  ib  liis  palace.    A  etste  of  such  eeculm?  feeblen^Ji! 

not  last  forever;  sooner  or  later  there  will  be,  in  the  divine 

mewjy  a  change  for  the  better,  and  the  Vicar  of  Christ  will  nn 

W  be  a  mark  for  insult  and  indignity.    But  one  thing  except 

^  an  aljnoet  miraculous  mterposition,  can  not  be-  and  Siat  is  a 

J!f"»|?  ™  nniversal  religious  sentiment,  the  public  oninion  nf 

iht  medieval  time.    The  Fo^  himself  calls  t^e  centuri^  "  the 

i«es  of  faitk"    Such  endemi<}  fiiith  maj  oertainlv  be  decreed  fop 

some  future  time;  but,  m  iir  aa  we  haV^  the  means  of  iud^h^rr  S 

lyen*^  centuries  m«at  run  out  firsi    Even  in  the  fourth  centurv 

tiM  tMimiafltioal  pnvileget,  claimed  on  the  one  hand,  irranted  on 

the  othep,  came  into  eibct  more  or  less  under  twoTndlJTonTtC 

i^nirfh  ^^"^  ^J  ?«bUe  kw.  and  that  thej  had  ZcoS* 

JSTof  hS  i&tthfchlfv^^^^^^  *^^  l'^'  /^'^' 

iTaI  11*1. "^lilu  .  .'y^'°'''<*  •"■"  ■•  »  matter  of  course 
!^.tL  N^  u  i  ^2««  centunea  ?  If  the  whole  worid  wiU  at  on^ 
!2!S1?  P  '  "  '"fu^  wopportane  to  teunt  ne  with  the  acts  rtf 
Sf^m^T^lf  V*"*  ""'  "^  ~5^°  ?"»««•  «•<>  noble«  when 

ff^LuZ^Ti^iJ^^  ''"""i '"  "i"  ?"**•■■*  ^'t  M'-  Gladstone  ia 
HI  ewneat  alarm,  earnest  with  the  eamestnees  which  dieting 

fo«S^^  iL^  that  "the  fean  are  vieioiuuy  ...  that  eithfr 
«n.^5  h:  » ^T.T*">  tre«K>n  can,  at  the  bidd^  of  the  Court 
-i^!'„i"'»K'"'' »''*''  Pe^^fo"  •horee;"  he  allo^  that  "iB  the 
-rfiUei^M  the  Pope,  contended,  not  by  direct  action  of  fleet. 
5*T..''"'.?»™^y  ""y  interdicts,^'  p.  35.  Yet  because 
»M«  tfaMk  bdieved  in  inteidiote,  thooch  now  they  dont  thVrefo™ 
the  «»a  Power  U  to  be  roused  agaSt  thrpZ     But  hren?- 

ZTk  ..^i  S  ""^""^  '  ''S'  *??  «»*'»«•  «»  Without  matter  to 
work  upon  r  Mere  a»mi«,  hke  big  words,  bK»ta  no  bones. 
&^  i.  S"'""  J  '*'5<*»tone  by  anticipation,  and  to  allaj  hi« 
W  ^?  fc  SI'"**.'  '  *«^™tion  three  years  ago  on  the  sub- 
{K^W^l^"^  *"."!?•  *•'■  Gl-dstone  qaot«i  {IShout  per<^iJ!: 
Jttfral^»T!"^  th«  very  a,«„nen^  which  he  brings  it  to 
W.^i^l'd^^f.h^Alf'^PiK'"  *«  P?Pe»  ««*••««  goes.  Tjoub*. 
Sr™idl^«  h  J^  ^™  the  pUce  in  the  pditicaTworld  which 

ja4  IS  oonduciTe  to  the  highest  mteresfa  of  mankind;  but  he  dis^ 
to«*lyteU.  ».  that  he  has  not  got  it,  and  can  not  have  it,  tiS  t 
£nS^^-  'i  ^-  r*P*"*  °^  "■''«•'  we  are  as  good  jud^  «, 

SL-^^'^"'^  ",  *i}\  ^^'^  P""tical  power,  that  of  interl 
ponng^  in  tiie  quarrel  between  a  prince  anfhis  subieei.  .n3  nf 

SriTL"''^  •rjr'iKn  ^'T.  ♦^»  "••»•  '^^  *e  Prince 
AM  or  had  not  forfeited  their  aUenanoe.    ThU  power  most 

Mtuj  ezmfsed,  and  on  very  eztraoidumrr  oeeasiona  and  with. 

out  «v  «d  of  infiUUbili^y  ii  the  exero£7onr»y  m„li!i 


THB  PAPAI.  CHUHCH. 


61 


the  civil  power  possesses  that  aid,  it  is  not  necessary  for  any 
Catholic  to  believe;  and  I  suppose,  comparatively  speaking,  few 
Catholics  do  believe  it;  to  be  honest,  I  must  say.  I  do;  that  is, 
under  the  conditions  which  the  Pope  himself  lays  down  in  the 
declaration  to  which  I  have  referred,  his  answer  to  the  address  of 
the  Academia.    He  speaks  of  his  right  "  to  depose  sovereigns^-] 
and  release  the  people  from  the  obligation  of  loyalty,  a  right 
which  had  undoubtedly  sometimes  been  exercised  in  oruomi  cip- 
cumstances."  and  he  says,  "This  right  (d/r<5«o)  in  those  ages  of 
laith— (which  discerned  in  the  Pope,  what  he  is,  that  is  to  say,  tne  ^ 
Supreme  Judge  of  Christianity,  and  recognized  the  advantages  ot 
his  tribunal  in  the  great  contests  of  peoples  and  sovereigns)— was 
freely  extended— (aided  indeed  as  a  matter  of  duty  bv  the  public 
law  (diritto)  and  by  the  common  consent  of  peoples)- to  the 
most  important  {ipiu  graoi)  interests  of  states  and  their  rulers. 
(Guardian,  Nov.  11,  1874.)  ,  .       *  xt- 

Now  let  us  observe  how  the  Pope  restrains  the  exercise  of  this 
piirht    He  calls  it  his  right— that  is,  in  the  sense  m  which  right 
in  one  party  is  correlative  with  duty  in  the  other,  so  that,  when 
the  duty  is  not  observed,  the  right  can  not  be  brought  into  exer- 
cise; and  this  is  precisely  what  he  goes  on  to  intimate ;  for  he  lays 
down  the  conditions  of  that  exercise.    First  it  can  only  be  exer- 
cised in  rare  and  critical  circumstances  {supreme  circanstanze,  % 
pa  aravi  mteressi).    Next  he  refers  to  his  bein^  the  supreme 
jud'^e  of  Christianity,  and  to  his  decision  as  commg  from  a  tri- 
bunal; his  prerogative  then  is  not  a  mere  arbitrary  power,  but 
must  be  exercised  by  a  process  of  law  and  a  formal  examination 
of  the  Ciise,  and  in  the  presence  and  the  hearing  of  the  two  par- 
ties interested  in  it    Also,  in  this  limitation  is  implied  that  the 
Pope's  definitive  sentence  involves  an  appeal  to  the  supreme 
standard  of  right  and  wrong,  the  moral  law,  as  its  basis  and  rule, 
and  must  contain  the  definite  reasons  on  which  it  decides  in  favor 
of  the  one  party  or  the  other.     Thirdly,  the  exercise  of  this  ri^ht 
is  limited  to  the  ages  of  faith ;  ^es  which,  on  the  one  hand,  in- 
scribed it  among  the  provisions  of  the  jus  publicum,  and  on  the 
other  so  fully  recognized  the  benefits  it  conferred,  as  to  be  able  to 
enforce  it  by  the  common  consent  of  the  peoples.    These  last 
words  should  be  dwelt  on  :  it  is  no  consent  which  is  merely  local, 
m  of  one  country,  of  Ireland  or  of  Belgium,  if  th^  were  proba- 
ble ;  but  a  united  consent  of  various  nations,  of  Eujope,  for  in- 
ttanee,  as  a  commonwealth,  of  which  the  Pope  was  the  head. 
Thirty  years  ago  we  heard  much  of  the  Pope  being  made  the 
head  of  an  Italian  confederation:  no  word  came  from  England 
against  such  an  arrangement    It  was  possible,  because  the  mem- 
bers of  it  were  all  of  one  religion;  and  in  hke  manner  a  Iku- 
ropean  commonwealth  would  be  reasonable,  if  Europe  were  of 
one  religion.     Lastly,  the  Pope  declares  with  indignation  that  a 
Pope  is  not  infaUible  in  the  exercise  of  this  right;  such  a  notion 
is  an  invention  of  the  enemy;  he  calls  it  "  malicious. 


DnriDHi  ALLiouifim 


|4.   DlTIDED  AlLMUKCB. 

But  0ii«  »ttribate  the  Church  has,  and  the  Pope  as  the  head  of 
w  ^''wK**'  'T^^l^^^^^^^  ^  »?  J^igh  estete,  as  th^is  world  goee,  or 
not,  whether  he  has  temporal  possessions  or  not,  whether  he  is  in 
ijoor  or  dishonor  whether  he  is  at  home  or  driven  about 
Viailier  those  special  claims  of  whioh  I  have  spoken  are  allowed 
or  notr-and  that  is,  SoTereignljr.  Am  Qod  "Lm  sovereigntj. 
SSSfrS  TL^  fif'^'^lf^  ^'  disowned,  so  has  His  Vicar  upon 
!!!lt'Jl!i  K    **'  '**".»'?  •'?*^  ^^°"^  populations  are  foind 

I2ir.«ri^^'  "  ft*  spreading  aa  the  British;  and'^all  his 
•all  mm  sure  to  be  each  as  are  in  keeping  with  the  position  of 
one  who  is  thus  supremely  exalted.  i^"i«b  oi 

♦«L^«?!*K^  Jr  mterrunted  here,  as  many  a  reader  will  inter- 
2t  ZVl  fK  **"«^^ '  ^*''  ^  am  using  these  words,  not  at  ran- 
fr2!«  L«l?  r*'Tr°*'^?®'*i  of  a  long  explanation,  and.  in* 
oeflain  sense  limitation,  of  what  1  have  hitherto  been  siyinir 
ooneernmg  the  Church  s  and  the  Pope's  power.  To  thiTtoSf 
the  remaining  pages,  which  I  have  to  addresVto  your  Grace  will 

^L  ^k:  ^  *    !  "^^^^  «*«*^J7  to  «how  what  he  does  not  claim. 
JMow  the  key-note  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  Pamphlet  is  this*  thai 

^  !^  2^/"T  '"^'"'*^i"J^  ^^^^***  an/morala.  aid  sin'c^ 
toote  are  no    departmente  and  functions  of  human  life  which  do 

TJ^k  T"*"'  f^^:?!**'';  ***^  **«'"*^"  of  morals."  p.  36,  and 
■inee  he  claims  lUso  "  the  domain  of  aU  that  concerns  the  eov- 
cmment  and  discipline  of  the  Church/*  and  moreover,  "  claims 
^IT'^'f  **^  determining  the  limits  of  those  doma  ns/' and 
^' does  not  sever  them,  bv  any  acknowledged  or  intelligible  lino 

of  civfl  duty  and  aUegiance,"  p.  45,  therefore 


SX]!!llr*'"'  T  ^T  --V  »-  »"«gmoce.    p.  ^o,  tneretoro 
CJatholies  are  moral  and  mental  slaves,  and  "every  convert  and 

Srm\';p\'„o^^^^  P*^*^  ^^  ^^^'^'y  '^'*<*  '^'^^  duty  at 

I. J  !l«  i  ^^'  Gladstones  premises,  but  I  reject  his  conclusion; 
And  now  I  am  going  to  show  why  I  reject  It 

¥»il'  ^*"^  ^^'\^  **'*!J'  Y*i*»„^«.  P«*  aside  for  the  present  the 
^??h«r^o72frK*'*  ""^  mfallibUity  in  general  en^inciations! 
whether  of  faUh  or  morals,  and  confine  myself  to  the  considera^ 
tXl  ?  authority  (m  respect  to  which  he  is  not  infallible)  in 
"t^!!  ^    ***'*J  «?»<1««*^,  and  of  our  duty  of  obedience  to  him. 

df  ;^«  "^2'  ^T**"**.*!*!*!*  *^  '^^  *«  an  Abiolut.  and  entire  Obe- 
ior  oSinS'  ?!f.irK^/-^^  ^T  '*«"*ltor  to  „>«.  whether  my  Super- 
TiLt  ZL^?^  ' 'i'^Vo*^  m"«  *"  t**  «/«^>^J«d  to  demand  ind 
exaoteontormity,  p.  39.  He  speaks  of  a  third  province  beini? 
opened,  *  not  Indeed  to  the  abstract  assertion  of  Infallihilitv  huf 
to  the  far  more  practical  and  decisivni^nd  of  Z& 
dience  p.41,  '*  the  Absolute  Obedience,  at  the  peril  of  sa^v^ 
tmn,  of  every  member  of  his  communion."  p.  42. 


DIYIBSD    JlLLBQIANCfl. 


63 


Now,  I  proceed  to  examine  this  large,  diroet,  religious  sover- 
eignty of  the  Pope,  both  in  its  relation  to  his  subjects,  and  to  the 
Civil  Power;  but  first,  I  beg  to  be  allowed  to  say  just  one  word 
on  the  principle  of  obedience  itself,  that  is,  by  way  of  inquiry, 
whether  it  is  or  is  not  now  a  religions  duty.  ,    .    ^.    , 

Is  there,  then,  such  a  duty  at  all  as  obedience  to  ecclesiastical 
authority  now  ?  or  is  it  one  of  those  obsolete  ideas,  which  are 
■wept  away,  as  unsightly  cobwebs,  by  the  New   Civilization? 
Scripture  says,  "Remember  them  which  have  the  rii^c pver  you, 
who  have  spoken  unto  you  the  word  of  God,  whose  faith  follow. 
And,  "Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you,  and  submit  your- 
selves; for  they  wateh  for  your  souls,  as  they  that  must  give  ac- 
count, that  they  may  do  it  with  joy  and  not  with  grief;   for  thai 
Is  unprofitable  for  you."    The  margin  in  the  Protestant  Version 
reads,  "those  who  are  your  guides;"  and  the  word  may  also  be 
translated  "  leaders."    Well,  as  rulers,  or  guides  and  leaders,  which- 
ever word  be  right,  they  are  to  be  obeyed.    Now  Mr.  Gladstone 
dislikes  our  way  of  fulfilling  this  precept,  whether  as  re^rds  our 
choice  of  ruler  and  leader,  or  our  "Absolute  Obedience'  to  him; 
but  he  does  not  give  us  his  own.     Is  there  any  liberalistio  read- 
ing of  the  Scripture  passage?    Or  are  the  words  only  for  the 
benefit  of  the  poor  and  ignorant,  not  for  the  Schola  {m  jt  may 
be  called)  of  political  and  periodical  writers,  not  for  individual 
members  of  Parliament,  not  for  statesmen  and  Cabinet  minis- 
ters, and  people  of  Progress?    Which  party,  then,  is  the  more 
"  Scriptural,"  those  who  recognize  and  carry  out  in  their  conduct 
texts   like  these,  or  those   who  don't?    May  not  we  Catholics 
claim  some  mercy  from  Mr.  Gladstone,  though  we  be  faulty  in 
the  object  and  the  manner  of  our  obedience,  since  in  a  lawless 
day  an  object  and  a  manner  of  obedience  we  have  ?    Can  we  be 
blamed,  1^  arguing  from  those  texts  which  say  that  ecclesiastical 
authority  comes  from  above,  we  obey  it  in  that  one  form  in  which 
alone  we  find  it  on  earth,  in  that  only  person  who  claims  it  of  us, 
among  all  the  notabilities  of  this  nineteenth  century  into  which 
we  have  been  born?    The  Pope  has  no  rival  in  his  claim  upon 
us;  nor  is  it  our  doing  that  his  claim  has  been  made  and  allowed 
for  centuries  upon  centuries ;  and  that  it  was  he  who  made  the 
Vatican  decrees,  and  not  they  him.     If  we  give  him  up,  to  whom 
shall  we  go  ?    Can  we  dress  up  any  civil  functionary  in  the  vest- 
ments of  divine  authority?    Can  1,  for  instance,  follow  the  faith, 
can  I  put  my  soul  into  the  hands,  of  our  gracious  Sovereign?  or 
of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  ?  or  of  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln, 
albeit  he  is  not  broad  and  low,  but  high  ?    Catholics  have  "  done 
what  they  could," — all  that  any  one  could:  and  it  should  be  Mr. 
Gladstone's  business,  before  telling  us  that  we  are  slaves,  because 
we  obey  the  Pope,  first  of  all  to  tear  away  those  texts  from  the 
Bible. 

With  this  preliminary  remark,  I  proceed  to  consider  whether 
the  Pope's  authority  is  either  a  slavery  to  his  subjects,  or  a  men- 
ace to  the  Civil  Power;  and  first,  as  to  his  power  over  his  flock! 

1.  Mr.  Gladstone  says  that  "the  Pontiff  declares  to  belong  to 
him  the  supreme  direction  of  Catholics  in  respect  to  all  dutyj 


m 


WVnmi   AILECUKCT. 


DIVIDED    ALLEQIAKCB. 


65 


p.  31    Siipme  «i|i^  ;  true,  but  "tuprome "  is  not  "  minute," 
«►'  <lo<»  "iiwotion    nnsan  Buperviaion  or  "  management."    Take 
Hi©  paralle]  of  human  law;   the  law  ie  ttiprme,  and  the  Law  di- 
reck  our  conduct  under  the  manifold  circumstances  in  which  we 
mm  to  act^  and  must  be  abeolutelv  obeved ;  but  who  therefore 
Mjs  llisl  the  law  has  the  "  supreme  direction  "  of  us  ?    The  State, 
ifl  well  as  the  Church,  his  the  power  at  its  will  of  imposing  laws 
iipon^  oi,  laws  boanng  on  our  moral  duties,  our  daily  conduct. 
•*c*iiig  owf  aetions  in  various  ways,  and  circumscribing  our  lib- 
«fii«i;  y«l  BO  one  would  say  that  the  Law,  after  all,  with  all  its 
power  in  the  abstract  and  its  executive  vigor  in  fact,  interferes 
eitHer  with  our  eomfort  or  our  conscience.    There  are  number- 
!??if^'.,f**""*  property,  landed  and   personal,  titles,   tenures. 
tMi»t%  wills,  covenants,  contracts,  partnerships,  money  transao- 
tionii  lifii-insurances,  taxes,  trade,  navigation,  education,  sanitair 
neasures.  trespasses,  nuisances,  all  in  addition  to  the  criminal  law. 
Law,  to  apply  Mr.  Gladstone's  words,  "  is  the  shadow  that  cleaves  to 
us  go  where  w©  will."    Moreover,  it  varies  year  after  year,  and 
«»»M»  to  give  any  pledge  of  fixedness  or  finality.    Nor  can  any 
©••toll  what mtraintis  to  come  next,  perhaps  painful  personally 
toJhiiiselC    Nor  are  its  enactments  easy  of  interpretation ;   for 
Mtaia  cases,  with  the  speeches  and  opinions  of  counsel,  and  the 
Jecisions  of  iudges,  must  prepare  the  raw  material,  as  it  proceeds 
fraui  the  l^fUature,  before  it  can  be  rightly  understood ;  so  that 
I*f  ^S'*®"*  uncertainty  of  the  Law  '^  has  become  a  proverb. 
And,  after  all,  no  one  is  sure  of  escaping  its  penalties  without 
the  aasistance  of  lawyers,  and  that  in  such  private  and  personal 
natters  that  the  lawyers  are,  as  by  an  imperative  duty,  bound  to 
»  i^crecv  which  even  oourte  of  justice  respect.      And  then, 
wwilet  the  Statute  Law,  there  is  the  common  and  traditional; 
•?**  Mow  this,  usage.    Is  not  all  this  enough  to  try  the  temper 
JT  s  liwi-born  Enclishman,  and  to  make  him  cry  out  with  Mr. 
Ohidstoa«,  "Three-fourths  of  my  life  are  handed  over  to  the  Law; 
1  irnre  not  to  ask  if  there  be  dregs  or  tetters  of  human  life,  such 
as  can  escape  from  the  description  and  boundary  of  Parliamentary 
granny?      Yet,  though  we  may  dislike  it,  though  we  may  at 
twica  iiiier  from  it  ever  so  much,  who  does  not  see  that  the 
ttratldom  and  irksomeness  are  nothing  compared  with  the  great 
"T!*?'^.*'*f '^  ^  Constitution  and  Legiskture  secure  to  us? 
WW      1*  i  ®  jiriidiction  which  the  law  exereises  over  us. 
Whal  rule  does  the  Pop  claim  which  can  be  compared  to  ito 
Btron|r  and  its  long  arm  f    What  interference  with  our  liberty  of 
JlligiDp  and  acting  in  our  daily  work,  in  our  course  of  life,  comes 
to  m  fiom  him?    Really,  at  first  sight,  I  have  not  known  where 
to  took  tor  instances  of  his  actual  interposition  in  our  private 
wmim,  mm  it  is  our  routine  of  personal  duties  about  which  I  am 

''^'w*^*^*"^*    -^^  ^  ^®®  ^*^^  ^'®  ®^"*^  »"  *^^8  matter. 

We  are  guided  in  our  ordinary  duties  by  the  books  of  moral 
tfctology,  which  are  drawn  up  by  theologians  of  authority  and  expe- 
rience, as  au  instruction  for  our  Confessors.  These  books  are 
bawsd  on  the  three  Christian  foundations  of  Faith,  Hope  and 
fjHanty,  on  the  Ten  Coiiiiiiiuidiiieiito,  and  on  the  six  Precepte  of 


the  Church   which  relate  to  the  observance  of  Sunday,  of  fast 
davs   of  ^nflwion  and  communion,  and.  in  one  shape  or  other 
t  mvinflTthheT    A  great  number  of  possible  cases  are  noted 

UTIEL t:Ss,  and^in  difficult  ^ TThr^H^^^^^^^^^ 
m  ffiven  with  plain  directions,  when  it  is  that  private  ^atholica 
Te  Slibi^  to  choose  for  themselves  whatever  answer  they  like 
best  and  Xn  they  are  bound  to  follow  some  one  of  them  m 
mrlicXr  Ke^^^^^  as  these  directions  in  detail  are  to  the 
Few  and  simple  heads  which  I  have  mentioned,  they  are  little 
mL  than  rXctions  and  memoranda  of  our  moral  sense  unhke 

Z  positive  enactments  of  the  ^^^^l'^^^*' ^ /f^f '  ^1'^,%^^^^^ 
present  to  us  no  difficulty-though  now  and  *j^^^  ««,"^^^f  ^^^^^^ 
Question  may  arise,  and  some  answer  may  be  given  gust  as  Dy 
SrpHvate  Conscience)  which  it  is  difficult  to  us  or  P^^^)^  ^  ^- 
cept  And  again,  cases  may  occur  now  ^^-^^  ^J,^;J^^^^^^^^ 
vate  iudirment  diffijrs  from  what  is  set  down  m  theological  works, 
but  iven  then  it  does  not  follow  at  once  that  our  P"vate  judg- 
ment mSst  give  way,  for  those  books  are  no  utterance  of  Papal 

^'"Anf&is  is  the  point  to  which  I  am  coming.  .So  little  does 
thfpope  come  into  this  whole  system  of  moral  theolo^  by 
which  ?as  by  our  conscience)  our  lives  are  regulated  that  the 
weght  oThiJhanduponus.  as  private  men.  is  absolutely  u^^^^^ 
nreciable  I  have  had  a  difficulty  where  to  find  a  measure  or 
Suge  of  his  in^^^^  At  length  I  have  looked  through  Bu- 

Sum's  "Medulla,"  to  ascertain  what  light  such  a  book  would 
?hro™n  the  question.     It  is  a  book  of  casuistry  for  the  use 
of  Sssoi,  running  to  tSo  pages,  and  is  a  .la^gY/CSce 
answers  madi  by  various  theologians  on  pomte  ^^^^""^'^^^^ 
and  generally  of  duty.     It  was  first  published  in  1545— my  own 
Sitiin  of  1844--and   in  the  latter  are  marked   those  proposi- 
&::rfn3  on  subjects  .t-ted  in  it,  which^^^^^^ 
demned  by  Popes  in  the  intermediate  200  y«^"-^^y"  *%> 
over  the  pies  I  find  they  are  in  aU  between  50  and  60.    Ihis 
n  includl  matters   sacramental,  "^^^S  «^«\«rnf  to  ^he  dt 
tic,  and  disciplinarian,  as  well   »«,  °^<>':*^^^>Vr^„i^/^;  Jt^ 
tie;  of  ecclesiastics  and  regulars,,  of  parish  F'^^ts^f -^f  P^^. 
fessional  men.  as  well  as  of  private  Catholics     And^^^^^^^^^^ 
demnations  relate  for  the  most  part  to  mere  «P,^««^^"^^^^ 
duty,  and  are  in  reprobation  of  the  lax  or  wild  motions  of  spec- 

ulatiVe  casuists,  so  that  they  are  rather  ff  *f  JP^^^nrare  sot^ 
Kians  than  upon  laymen.  For  instance,  tbe  following  are  Bome 
?f?he  proportions  condemned:  *;The  ecclesiastic,  who  ^n  a  cer^ 
tein  day  is^indered  from  saying  Latins  and  Lauds,  «^^^^^^ 
to  say,  if  he  can,  the  remaining  hours;  ^here  there  is  go^ 
cause,  it  is  lawful  to  swear  without  the  P«n)0«e,of  swearin^^^ 
whether  the  matter  is  of  light  or  grave  moment;  f «^^^^^^^^ 
Biay  steal  from  their  masters,  in  .<^^mpen8ation  for  the^^^Bcrv^^^^ 
which  they  think  greater  than  their  wages ;  "It  is  lawful  tor  a 
public  man  to  kill  an  opponent,  who  tries  to  fasten  a , calumny 
Spon  him.  if  he  can  not  otherwise  escape  the^g'^ommy  I  ha^ 
Xen  the^e  instances,  at  random.  It  must  be  granted,  I  think. 
6 


61 


that  in  the  long  course  of  200  years  the  amonnl  of  the  Pope's 
authoritatiTe  enunciations  has  not  been  such  as  to  press  heavily 
on  the  back  of  the  private  Catholie.  He  leaves  us  surely  far 
more  than  that  "one-fourth  of  the  department  of  conduct," 
which  Mr.  Ghidstone  allows  us.  Indeed,  if  my  account  and 
fpeeimens  of  his  sway  over  us  in  morals  be  correct,  I  do  not  see 
what  he  takes  away  at  all  from  our  private  consciences. 

Mf,  Glailstone  says  that  the  Pop  virtually  claims  to  himself 
the  wide  domain  of  conduct,  and  therefore  that  we  are  his  slaves. 
Let  US  see  if  another  illustration  or  parallel  will  not  show  this 
to  bo  a  noil  sequihtr.  Suppose  a  man,  who  is  in  the  midst  of 
various  and  important  lines  of  business,  has  a  medical  adviser,  in 
whom  he  has  full  confidence,  as  knowing  well  his  constitution. 
This  adviser  keeps  a  careful  and  anxious  eye  upon  him ;  and,  as 
an  honest  man,  says  to  him,  "  You  must  not  go  off  on  a  journey 
to-day,"  or  "  vou  must  take  some  days'  rest,"  or  "you  must  attend 
to  your  diet.  Now,  this  is  not  a  fair  parallel  to  the  Pope's  hold 
upon  us ;  for  he  does  not  speak  to  us  personally  but  to  all,  and 
in  speaking  definitely  on  ethical  subjects,  what  he  propounds 
must  relate  to  things  good  and  bad  in  themselves,  not  to  things 
accidental,  changeable,  and  of  mere  expedience;  so  that  the  ar- 
gument which  I  am  drawine  from  the  case  of  a  medical  adviser  is 
iyorlfoW  in  its  character.  However,  I  say  that,  though  a  medical 
man  exercises  a  "  supreme  direction"  of  those  who  put  themselves 
under  him,  yet  we  do  not  therefore  say,  even  of  him,  that  he  inter- 
feres with  our  daily  conduct,  and  that  we  are  his  slaves.  He  oer- 
tainlv  does  thwart  many  of  our  wishes  and  purposes ;  in  a  true  sense 
we  are  at  his  mercy ;  he  may  interfere  anj  day,  suddenly ;  he  wUl 
not,  he  can  not,  draw  any  line  between  his  action  and  our  action. 
The  same  journey,  the  same  press  of  business,  the  same  induK 
eence  at  table,  wnich  he  passes  over  one  year,  he  sternly  forbids 
lie  next.  If  Mr.  Gladstone's  argument  is  good,  he  has  a  finger 
in  all  the  commercial  transactions  of  the  great  merchant  or  finan- 
cier who  has  chosen  him.  But  surely  there  is  a  simple  fallacy 
here.  Mr.  Gladstone  asks  us  whether  our  political  and  civil  life 
is  not  at  the  Pope's  mercy ;  every  act,  he  says,  of  at  least  three- 
quarters  of  the  day,  is  under  his  control.  No,  not  etJ«ry,  but 
njif ,  and  this  is  all  the  difference — ^that  is,  we  have  no  piarantee 
given  us  that  there  will  never  be  a  ca«e,  when  tlie  Pope  s  general 
mtteianees  may  come  to  have  a  bearing  upon  some  personal  act 
of  ours.  In  tne  same  way  we  are  all  of  us  in  this  age  under  the 
control  of  public  opinion  and  the  public  prints ;  nay,  much 
more  intimately  so.  Journalism  can  be  and  is  very  personal ; 
and,  when  it  is  in  the  right,  more  powerful  just  now  than  any 
Pope;  yet  we  do  not  go  into  fits,  as  ir  we  were  slaves,  because  we 
are  under  a  snrmillance  much  more  like  tyranny  than  any  sway, 
so  indirect,  so  praistically  limited,  so  gentle,  as  his  is. 

But  it  seems  the  cardinal  point  of  our  slavery  lies,  not  simply 
in  the  domain  of  morals,  but  in  the  Pope's  |];eneral  authority 
over  us  in  all  things  whatsoever.  This  count  in  his  indictment 
Mr.  Gladstone  founds  on  a  passage  in  the  third  chapter  of  the 
Fmtor  miemus,  in  which  the  Pope,  speaking  of  the  Pontifical 


DIVIDED  ALLBOIANOB. 


67 


jurisdiction,  says:  "Towards  it  (crga  quam)  pastors  and  Deople 
^f  whatsoever  rite  or  dignity,  each  and  *i».  *«;?.  ^"''^  ^^^ 
duty  of  hierarchal  subordination  and  true  obedience,  not  only 
in  matters  which  pertain  to  faith  and  morals,  but  also  in  those 
which  pertain  to  tfie  disciplme  and  the  regimen  of  the  Church 
spread  throughout  the  world;  so  that  unity  ^^^^  **»«  f ^^^^^J 
Antiff  (both  of  communion  and  of  profession  of  the  saine  faith) 
being  pJeserved.  the  Church  of  Christ  may  be  one  flock  under 
one  fupreme  Shepherd.  This  is  the  doctrine  of  Catholic  teutK 
from  wlLich  no  one  can  deviate  without  loss  of  faith  and  salva- 

On  Mr.  Gladstone's  use  of  this  passage  I  observe  fijj*.  **>»*  ^^ 
leaves  out  a  portion  of  it  which  hw  much  to  do  with  the  due 
understandiniof  it  (ita  ut  custodita,  etc.)  Next,  he  sneaks  of 
"  absolute  obedience  ^  so  often,  that  any  reader  who  had  not  the 
passage  before  him.  would  think  that  the  ^^rd  "absolute  was 
the  Pope's  word,  not  his.  Thirdly,  three  times  (at  PP-  38,  41, 
and  42)  does  he  make  the  Pope  say  that  no  one  can  duobey  him 
without  risking  his  salvation,  whereas  what  the  Pope  does  say  is, 
that  no  one  can  disbelieve  the  dniy  of  obedience  and  unity  with- 
out such  risk.  And  fourthly,  in  order  to  carry  out  this  felse 
sense,  or  rather  to  hinder  its  being  evidently  impossible  he  mi^ 
translates  p.   38,  "doctrina"  (Hsec  est  doctrina)  by  the  word 

But  his  chief  attack  is  directed  to  the  words  "  disciplina     and 
*•  regimen."      "  Thus,"  he  says,  "  are  swept  into  the  Papal  net 
whole  multitudes  of  facts,  whole  systems  of  government,  prevail- 
ing,  though  in  different  degrees,  in  every  country  of  the  wor  d, 
B  41      That  is,  disciplina  and  regimen  are  words  of  such  lax, 
vagiie.  indeterminate  meaning,  that  under  them  any  matters  can 
be  slipped  in  which  may  be  required  for  the  Pope  s  purpose  in 
this  or  that  country,  such   as,  to  take  Mr.  Gladstone  s  instances, 
blasphemy,  poor-relief,    incorporation  and  mortmain;    as   it  no 
definitions  were  contained  in  our  theological  and  ecclesiastical 
works  of  words  in  such  common  use,  and  as  if  m  consequence 
the  Pope  was  at  liberty  to  give  them  any  sense  of  his  own.    As 
to  discrpline,  Fr.  Perrone  says  "  Discinline  comprises  the  exterior 
worship  of  God.  the  liturgy,  sacred  rites,  psalmody,  the  sdminis- 
tration  of  the  sacraments,  the  canonical  form  of  sacred  elections 
and  the  institution  of  ministers,  vows,  feast^ays,  and  the  like; 
all  of  them  (observe)  matters  internal  to  the  Church,  and  without 
anv  relation  to  the  Civil  Power  and  civil  affairs.     Perrone  adds, 
"iScclesiastical  discipline  is  a  practical  and  external  rule,  pre- 
scribed by  the  Church,  in  order  to  retain  the  faithful  m  their 
faith,  and  the  more  easily  lead  them  on  to  eternal  happiness, 
yrml  Theol  t.  2.  p.  381.  2d  ed.  1841.     Thus  discipline  is  i n  no 
sense  a  political  instrument,  except  as  the  profession  of  our  faith 
mav  accidentally  become  political.    In  the  same  sense  Zallinger : 
"  the  Roman  Pontiff  has  by  divine  right  the  power  of  passing 
universal  laws  pertaining  to  the  discipline  of  the  Church;  for 
instance,   to  divine  worship,  sacred    rite.s,  the  ordination   and 
manner  of  life  of  the  clergy,  the  order  of  the  ecclesiastical  regi- 


m 


DIVIDBD  AILEOIANGB. 


mill,  and  ilie  right  Kiministration  of  the  temporal  possesiions 
of  the  Church."— /Mr.  Eccles.  lib.  i.,  i  2, 1 121. 

So,  too,  the  woid  "regimen"  has  a  definite  meaning,  relating 
to  a  matter  strictly  internal  to  the  Church;  it  means  govern- 
ment, or  the  mode  or  form  of  government,  or  the  course  of  gov- 
ernment, and,  as,  in  the  intercourse  of  nation  with  nation,  the 
nature  of  a  nation's  government,  whether  monarchical  or  repuh- 
liQan,  does  not  come  into  question,  so  the  constitution  of  the 
Church  simplv  belongs  to  its  nature,  not  to  its  external  action. 
Thmm  are  indeed  aspects  of  the  Church  which  involve  relations 
toward  secular  powers  and  to  nations,  as,  for  instance,  its  mis- 
wmart  office ;  but  regimen  has  relation  to  one  of  its  internal 
liiiMMtaristics,  viz.,  its  form  of  government,  whether  we  call  it  a 
pure  monarchy  or  with  others  a  monarchy  tempered  by  aristoo- 
lacy.  Thus  Tournely  says,  "  Three  kinds  of  regimen  or  gov- 
ernment are  set  down  by  philosophers,  monarchy,  aristocracy, 
and  democracy,"  Theol,  t.  2,  p.  100.  Bellarmine  savs  the 
same,  i2oi».  Font  I  2;  and  Perrone  takes  it  for  granted,  ibid, 

pp.  70,  71.  .       .  ,  ,. 

Now,  why  does  the  Pope  speak  at  this  time  of  regimen  and  dis- 
eipline?    He  tells  us,  in  that  portion   of  the  sentence,  which, 
thinking  it  of  no  account,  Mr.  Gladstone  has  omitted.    The  Pone 
toPs  us  that  all  Catholics  should  recollect  their  duty  of  obedi- 
ence to  him,  not  only  in  faith  and  morals,  but  in  such  matters 
of  regimen  and  discipline  as  belonged  te  the  universal  Church, 
"  so  that  unity  wiUi  the  Roman  Pontiff;  both  of  communion  and 
©f  profession  of  the  same  faith  being  preserved,  the  Church  of 
Christ  may  be  one  flock  under  one  supreme  Shepherd."    I  con- 
sider this  passage  to  he  especially  aimed  at  Nationalism :    "  Rec- 
ollect," the  Pope  seems  to  say,  "  the  Church  is  one,  and  that,  not 
only  in  faith  and  morals,  for  schismatics  may  profess  as  much  as 
iiis,  but  one,  wherever  it  is,  all  over  the  world ;  and  not  only  one, 
hut  one  and  the  same,  bound  together  by  its  one  regimen  and 
iisei^ine,  and  by  the  same  regimen  and  discipline,— the  same 
tiles,  the  same  sacraments,  the  same  usages,  and  the  same  one 
PiMtor;  and  in  these  bad  times  it  is  necessary  for  all  Catholics  to 
recollect,  that  this  doctrine  of  the  Church's  individuality  and,  as 
it  were,  personality,  is  not  a  mere   received  opinion  or  under- 
■iMiding,  which  may  be  entertained  or  not,  as  we  please,  but  is 
ft  faidamental  necessary  truth."    This  being,  sneaking  under 
MSiMtion,  the  drift  of  the  passage,  I  observe  that  the  words 
•'■■Itead  throughout  the  world"  or  "universal"  are  so  far  from 
turning  "  discipline  and  regimen"  into  what  Mr.  Gladstone  calls 
a  "  net,"  that  they  contract  the  range  of  both  of  them,  not  in- 
cluding, as  he  would  have  it,  "marriage"  here,  "blasphemy" 
there,  and  "poor-relief"  in  a  third  oountrv,  but  noting  and  speci- 
fying that  one  and  the  same  structure  of  laws,  rites,  rules  ofgov- 
emment,  independency,  every-where,  of  which  the  Pope  himself 
is  the  center  and  life.     And  surely  this  is  what  every  one  of  us 
will  say  with  the  Pope,  who  is  not  an  Erastian,  and  who  believes 
that  the  Gospel  is  no  mere  philosophy  thrown  upon  the  world 
at  large,  no  mere  quality  of  mind  and  thought,  no  mere  beautiful 


PITIPBII   ALLBOUNOB. 


and  deep  sentiment  or  subjective  opinion,  but  a  substantive  mee- 
aage  from  above,  guarded  and  preserved  in  a  visible  polity. 

2.  And  now  I  am  naturally  led  on  to  speak  of  the  Poi>e'8  su- 
preme authority,  such  as  I  have  described  it,  in  its  bearing  to- 
wards the  Civil  Power  all  over  the  world,— various,  as  the  Church 
is  invariable, — a  power  which  as  truly  comes  from  God,  as  his 

own  does. 

That  collisions  can  take  place  between  the  Holy  See  and  na- 
tional governments,  the  history  of  fifteen  hundred  years  teacheo 
us;  also,  that  on  both  sides  there  may  occur  grievous  mistakes. 
But  my  question  all  along  lies,  not  with  "quicquid  delirant  re- 
ges,"  but  with  what,  under  the  circumstance  of  such  a  collision, 
m  the  duty  of  those  who  are  both  children  of  the  Pojje  and  sub- 
jects of  the  Civil  Power.  As  to  the  duty  of  the  Civil  Power,  I 
have  already  intimated  in  my  first  section,  that  it  should  treat 
the  Holy  See  as  an  independent  sovereign,  and  if  this  rule  had 
been  observed,  the  difficulty  to  Catholics  in  a  country  not  Catho- 
lic, would  be  most  materially  lightened.  Great  Britain  recog- 
niies  and  is  recognized  by  the  United  States ;  the  two^  powers 
have  ministers  at  each  other's  courts ;  here  is  one  standing  pre- 
vention of  serious  quarrels.  Misunderstandings  between  the  two 
co-ordinate  powers  may  arise ;  but  there  follow  explanations,  re- 
movals of  the  causes  of  offense,  acts  of  restitution.  In  actual 
collisions,  there  are  conferences,  compromises,  arbitrations.  Now 
the  point  to  observe  here  is,  that  in  such  cases  neither  party  gives 
up  its  abstract  rights,  but  neither  party  practicallv  insists  on 
them.  And  each  party  thinks  itself  in  the  right  in  the  particular 
case,  protests  .against  any  other  view,  but  still  concedes.  Neither 
party  says,  "I  will  not  make  it  up  with  you,  till  you  draw  an  in- 
telligible line  between  your  domain  and  mine.'  I  suppose  in 
the  Geneva  arbitration,  though  we  gave  way,  we  still  thought 
that,  in  our  conduct  in  the  American  civil  war,  we  had  acted 
within  our  rights.  1  say  all  this  in  answer  to  Mr.  Gladstone's 
challenge  to  us  to  draw  the  line  between  the  Pope's  domain  and 
the  State's  domain  in  civil  or  political  questions.  Many  a  pri- 
vate American,  1  suppose,  lived  in  London  and  Liverpool,  all 
through  the  corresponaence  between  our  Foreign  Office  and  the 

government  of  the  United  States,  and  Mr.  Gladstone  never  ad- 
ressed  any  expostulation  to  them,  or  told  them  they  had  lost 
their  moral  fre^om  because  they  took  part  with  their  own  gov- 
ernment. The  French,  when  their  late  war  began,  did  sweep 
their  German  sojourners  out  of  France,  (the  number,  as  J  recol- 
lect, was  very  great,)  but  they  were  not  considered  to  have  done 
themselves  much  credit  by  such  an  act.  When  we  went  to  war 
with  Russia,  the  English  in  St  Petersburg  made  an  address,  I 
think,  to  the  Emperor,  asking  for  his  protection,  and  he  gave  it; — 
I  do  n't  suppose  they  pledged  themselves  to  the  Russian  view  of 
the  war,  nor  would  he  have  called  them  slaves  instead  of  patriots, 
if  they  had  refused  to  do  so.  Suppose  England  were  to  send  her 
ironclads  to  support  Italy  against  the  Pope  and  his  allies, 
English  Catholics  would  be  very  indignant;  they  would  take  paH 
with  tiie  Pope  before  the  war  began ;  they  would  use  all  constitu- 


TO 


PIfim  ALLMIUICCI. 


iional  meuis  to  hindoT  it;  but  who  belieTea  tliat,  when  they  were 
Moe  in  the  war,  their  action  would  be  any  thing  eke  than 
prayers  and  exertions  for  a  termination  of  it?  What  reason  is 
there  for  saying  that  they  would  commit  themselves  to  any  stop 
of  a  treasonable  nature,  any  more  than  loyal  Germans,  had  they 
ioea allowed  to  remain  in  France?  Yet,  because  those  Germans 
wwild  not  relinquish  their  allegiance  to  their  country,  Mr.  Glad- 
stone, were  he  consistent,  would  at  once  send  them  adrift. 

Of  course  it  will  be  said  that  in  these  cases,  there  is  no  double 
aiegiance,  and  again  that  the  German  Government  did  not  call 
upon  them,  as  the  Pope  mi^ht  call  upon  English  Catholics,  nay, 
eommand  them,  to  take  a  side;  but  mj  argument  at  least  shows 
this,  that  till  there  comes  to  us  a  special,  direct  command  from 
the  Pope  to  oppose  our  country,  we  need  not  be  said  to  have 
" placed  our  loyaltv  and  civil  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another,"  p, 
45.  It  is  strange  tnat  a  great  statesman,  versed  in  the  new  and 
inie  philosophy  of  compromise,  instead  of  taking  a  practical  view 
of  the  actual  situation,  should  proceed  a^inst  us,  like  a  Professor 
in  the  sehools,  with  the  "parade"  of  his  "relentless"  (and  may 
I  add  '•rusiy"?)  "logic,"  p.  23. 

I  say,  till  the  Pope  told  us  to  eiert  ourselves  for  his  cause  in  a 
quarrel  with  this  country,  as  in  the  time  of  the  Armada,  we  need 
not  attend  to  an  abstract  and  hypothetical  difficulty:^ — ^then,  and 
not  till  then.  I  add,  as  before,  that  if  the  Holy  See  were  frankly 
leeognized  by  Encjland,  as  other  Sovereign  Powers  are,  direct 
quariehi  between  the  two  powers  would  in  this  age  of  the  world 
be  rare  indeed ;  and  still  rarer,  their  becoming  so  energetic  and 
uripsnt  as  to  descend  into  the  heart  of  the  community,  and  to  dis- 
tarb  the  consciences  and  the  family  unity  of  private  Catholics. 

But  now,  lastly,  let  us  suppose  one  of  these  extraordinary  cases 
of  direct  and  open  hostility  between  the  two  powers  actually  to 
mmr; — here,  first,  we  must  bring  befbre  us  the  state  of  the  case. 
Of  course,  we  must  recollect,  on  the  one  hand,  that  Catholics  are 
not  only  bound  to  allegiance  to  the  British  Crown,  but  have  spe- 
cial privileges  as  citisena,  can  meet  together,  speak  and  pass  reso- 
lutions, can  vote  for  members  of  Parliament,  and  sit  in  Parlia- 
ment, and  can  hold  office,  all  which  are  denied  to  foreigners 
sojourning  among  us;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  the 
authority  of  the  Pope,  which,  though  not  "absolute"  even  in  re- 
ligious matters,  as  Mr.  Gladstone  would  have  it  to  be,  has  a  call, 
a  supreme  call,  on  our  obedience.  Certainly  in  the  event  of  such 
a  ooilision  of  jurisdictions,  there  are  cases  in  which  we  should 
ob^  the  Pope  and  disobey  the  State.  Suppose,  for  instance,  an 
Aet  was  passed  in  Parliament,  bidding  Catnolics  to  attend  Pro- 
testant service  every  week,  and  the  Pope  distinctly  told  us  not  to 
d0  BO,  for  it  was  to  violate  our  duty  to  our  faith:— T  should  obey 
the  Pope  and  not  the  Law.  It  will  be  said  by  Mr.  Gladstone,  that 
sueh  a  case  is  impossible.  I  know  it  is;  but  why  ask  me  for  what 
I  should  do  in  extreme  and  utterly  improbable  cases  such  as  this, 
if  my  answer  can  not  help  bearing  the  character  of  an  axiom? 
It  is  not  my  fault  that  I  must  deal  m  truisms.  The  circumferen- 
m§  of  State  jnriedictioD  and  of  Papal  are  for  the  most  part  quite 


DUnnBD  ALLfiOUNOK. 


71 


apart  ftom  each  other ;  there  are  just  some  few  degrees  out  of  the 
360  in  which  they  intersect,  and  Mr.  Gladstone,  instead  of  letting 
these  cases  of  intersection  alone,  till  they  occur  actually,  asks  me 
what  I  should  do  if  I  found  myself  placed  in  the  space  intersected. 
If  I  must  answer  then,  I  should  say  distinctly  that  did  the  State 
tell  me  in  a  question  of  worship  to  do  what  the  Pope  told  me  not 
to  do,  I  should  obey  the  Pope,  and  should  think  it  no  sin  if  I  used 
all  the  power  and  the  influence  I  possessed  as  a  citizen  to  prevent 
such  a  Bill  passing  the  Legislature,  and  to  effect  its  repeal  if  it 

^at  now,  on  the  other  ha™,.  cooM  the  case  eve,  occur,  in  which 
I  should  act  with  the  Civil  Power,  and  not  with  the  Pope?  Now, 
here  again,  when  I  begin  to  imagine  instances.  Catholics  will  cry 
out  (as  Mr.  Gladstone  in  the  case  I  supposed,  cried  out  in  the  inter- 
est of  the  other  side),  that  instances  never  can  occur.  I  know  they 
can  not ;  I  kndw  the  Pope  never  can  do  what  I  am  going  to  sup- 
pose ;  but  then,  since  it  can  not  possibly  happen  in  fact,  there  is 
no  harm  in  just  saying  what  I  should  (hypothetically)  do,  if  it 
did  happen.  I  say  then  in  certain  (impossible)  cases  I  should 
side,  not  with  the  Pope,  but  with  the  Civil  Power.  For  instance, 
I  believe  members  of  Parliament,  or  of  the  Privy  Council,  take  an 
oath  that  they  would  not  acknowledge  the  right  of  succession  of 
a  Prince  of  Wales,  if  he  became  a  Catholic.  I  should  not  con- 
sider the  Pope  could  release  me^from  that  oath  had  I  bound  my- 
self by  it.  Of  course,  I  might  exert  myself  to  the  utmost  to  get 
the  act  repealed  which  bound  me ;  f^n,  if  I  could  not,  I  might 
retire  from  Parliament  or  office,  and  so  rid  myself  of  the  engage- 
ment I  had  made ;  but  I  should  be  clear  that,  though  the  Pope 
liade  all  Catholics  to  stand  firm  in  one  phalanx  for  the  Catholic 
Succession,  still,  while  I  remained  in  my  office,  or  in  my  place  in 
Parliament,  I  could  not  do  as  he  bade  me. 

Again,  were  I  actually  a  soldier  or  salior  in  Her  Majesty's  serv- 
ice, and  sent  to  take  part  in  a  war  which  I  could  not  in  mjr  con- 
science see  to  be  unjust,  and  should  the  Pope  suddenly  bid  all 
Catholic  soldiers   and   sailors  to  retire  from  the  service,  here 

Xin,  taking  the  advice  of  others,  as  best  I  could,  I  should  not 
V  him. 

What  is  the  use  of  forming  impossible  cases  ?  One  can  find 
plenty  of  them  in  books  of  casuistry,  with  the  answers  attached 
m  respect  to  them.  In  an  actual  case,  a  Catholic  would,  of 
course,  not  act  simply  on  his  own  judgment;  at  the  same  time, 
there  are  supposable  cases  in  which  he  would  be  obliged  to  go  by 
it  solely — vis.,  when  his  conscience  could  not  be  reconciled  to  any 
of  the  courses  of  action  proposed  to  him  by  others. 

In  support  of  what  I  have  been  saying,  I  refer  to  one  or  two 
weighty  authorities : — 

Cardinal  Turrecremata  says: — "Although  it  clearly  follows 
from  the  circumstance  that  the  Pope  can  err  at  times,  and  com- 
mand things  which  must  not  be  done,  that  we  are  not  to  be  sim- 
ply obedient  to  him  in  all  things,  that  does  not  show  that  he 
must  not  be  obeyed  by  all  when  his  commands  are  good.  To 
know  in  what  cases  he  is  to  be  obeyed  and  in  what  not    .    .    . 


73 


BITIIIID  AMMiUMm. 


OOKSCUBKCE. 


73 


II  is  iMd  in  the  Acta  of  tb«  Apostlea,  'One  ought  to  obey  God 
rttther  than  man ; '  therefore,  were  the  Pope  to  command  any 
tiling  against  Holy  Scripture,  or  the  articles  of  faith,  or  the 
truth  of  the  Sacraments,  or  the  commands  of  the  natural  or  dl- 
Tine  laws,  he  ought  not  to  be  obeyed,  but  in  such  commands  to  be 
passed  over  (despiciendus),"  Summ,  de  EccL,  pp.  47,  8. 

Bellarmine,  speaking  of  resisting  the  Pope,  says :— "  In  order 
to  resist  and  defend  oneself  no  authority  is  req^uired.  .  .  . 
Shiiraim,  as  it  is  lawful  to  resist  the  Pope,  if  he  assaulted  a 
man's  person,  so  it  is  lawful  to  resist  him  if  he  assaulted  souls, 
m  troubled  the  state  (turbanti  rempublicam),  and  much  more  if 
he  strove  to  destroy  the  Church.  It  is  lawlul,  I  say,  to  resist 
him,  bv  not  doing  what  he  commands,  and  hindering  ^e  execu- 
tion of  his  will,"  de  Mom.  Pont.,  ii.  29. 

Archbishop  Kenrick  says:— "His  power  was  given  for  edifica- 
tion, not  for  destruction.  If  he  uses  it  from,  the  love  of  domina- 
tion (quod  absit)  scarcely  will  he  meet  with  obedient  popular 
Uon."-^Theol.  Moral,  t  i.,  p.  158. 

When,  then,  Mr.  Gladstone  asks  Catholics  how  they  can  obey 
the  Queen  and  yet  obey  the  Pope,  since  it  may  happen  that  the 
commands  of  the  two  authorities  may  clash,  I  answer,  that  it  is 
my  mh,  both  to  obey  the  one  and  to  obey  the  other,  but  that 
there  is  no  rule  in  this  world  without  exceptions,  and  if  either 
the  Pope  or  the  Queen  demanded  of  me  an  "Absolute  Obedience," 
he  or  sne  would  be  transgressing  the  laws  of  human  nature  and 
huilian  society.  I  give  an  absolute  obedience  to  neither.  Fur- 
ther, if  ever  this  double  allegiance  pulled  me  in  contrary  ways, 
which  in  this  age  of  the  world  I  think  it  never  will,  then  I 
■hiMld  decide  according  to  the  particular  case,  which  is  beyond 
all  rule,  and  must  be  decided  on  its  own  merits.  1  should  look 
to  see  what  theologians  could  do  for  me,  what  the  Bishops  and 
dtwy  ■fwind  me,  what  my  confessor ;  what  friends  whom  I  re- 
TerSi ;  and  if,  aller  all.  I  could  not  take  their  view  of  the  matter, 
then  I  must  rule  myself  by  my  own  judgment  and  my  own  con- 
Mience.    But  all  this  is  hypothetical  and  unreal. 

Here,  of  course,  it  will  be  objected  to  me,  that  I  am,  after  all, 
having  recourse  to  the  Protestant  doctrine  of  Private  Judgment; 
not  so;  it  is  the  Protestant  doctrine  that  Private  Judgment  is  our 
ordinary  guide  in  religious  matters,  but  I  use  it,  in  the  case  in 
question,  in  very  extraordinary  and  rare,  nay,  impossible  emer- 
gencies. Do  not  the  highest  Tories  thus  defend  the  substitution 
of  William  for  James  U.  ?  It  is  a  great  mistake  to  suppose  our 
■tale  in  the  Catholic  Church  is  so  entirely  subjected  to  rule  and 
qptem,  that  we  are  never  thrown  upon  what  is  called  by  divines 
"ii©  Providence  of  God."  The  teaching  and  assistance  of  the 
Church  does  not  supply  all  conceivable  needs,  but  those  which 
are  ordinary;  thus,  for  instance,  the  sacraments  are  necessary 
for  dying  in  the  grace  of  God  and  hope  of  heaven,  yet,  when 
thej  can  not  be  got,  acts  of  hope,  faith,  and  contrition,  with  the 
dtnre  for  those  aids  which  the  dyin^  man  has  not,  will  convey 
in,  taiitance  what  those  aids  ordinarily  convey.  And  so  a  Cat- 
echumen, not  yet  baptized,  may  be  saved  by  liis  purpose  and 


nrmiaration  to  receive  the  rite.  And  so,  again,  though  "  Out  of 
the  Church  there  is  no  salvation,"  this  does  not  hold  in  the  case 
of  good  men  who  are  in  invincible  iterance.  And  so  it  is  also 
in  ttie  case  of  our  ordinations;  ChiUingworth  and  Macaulay  say 
that  it  is  morally  impossible  that  we  should  have  kept  up  for 
1  800  years  an  Apostolical  succession  of  ministers  without  some 
separation  of  the  chain ;  and  we  in  answer  say  that  however  true 
this  may  be  humanly  speaking,  there  has  been  a  special  Provi- 
dence over  the  Church  to  secure  it.  Once  more,  how  else  could 
private  Catholics  save  their  souls  when  there  was  a  Pope  and 
Anti-popes,  each  severally  claiming  their  allegiance? 

{5.  CONSOIEirOE. 

It  seems,  then,  that  there  are  extreme  cases  in  which  Con- 
science may  come  into  collision  with  the  word  of  a  Pope,  and  is 
to  be  followed  in  spite  of  that  word.  Now  I  wish  to  place  this 
proposition  on  a  broader  basis,  acknowledged  by  all  Catholics, 
an<f  in  order  to  do  this  satisfactorily,  as  I  began  with  the  proph- 
ecies of  Scripture  and  the  primitive  Church,  when  I  spoke  of  the 
Pope*s  prerogatives,  so  now  I  must  begin  with  the  Creator  and 
His  creature,  when  I  would  draw  out  the  prerogatives  and  the  su- 
preme authority  of  Conscience. 

I  say,  then,  that  the  Supreme  Being  is  of  a  certain  character, 
which,  expressed  in  human  lan^age,  we  call  ethical.  He  has  the 
attributes  of  justice,  truth,  wisdom,  sanctity,  benevolence,  and 
mercy,  as  eternal  characteristics  in  His  Nature,  the  very  Law  of 
His  being,  identical  with  Himself;  and  next,  when  He  became 
Creator,  He  implanted  this  Law,  which  is  Himself,  in  the  intelli- 
gence of  all  His  rational  creatures.  The  Divine  Law,  then,  is  the 
rule  of  ethical  truth,  the  standard  of  right  and  wrong,  a  sover- 
eign, irreversible,  absolute  authority  in  the  presence  of  men  and 
Angels.  "  The  eternal  law,"  says  St.  Augustine,  "  is  the  Divine 
Reason  or  Will  of  God,  commanding  the  observance,  forbidding 
the  disturbance,  of  the  natural  order  of  things."  "The  natural 
law,"  says  St.  Thomas,  "  is  an  impression  of  the  Divine  Light  in 
us,  a  participation  of  the  eternal  law  in  the  rational  creature." 
(Gousset,  Theol  Moral,  t,  1,  pp.  24,  etc  )  This  law,  a^  appre- 
hended in  the  minds  of  individual  men,  is  called  "  conscience ;  " 
and,  though  it  may  suffer  refraction  in  passing  into  the  intellect- 
ual medium  of  each,  it  is  not  tiiereby  so  affected  as  to  lose  its 
character  of  being  the  Divine  Law,  but  still  has,  as  such,  the  pre- 
rogative of  commanding  obedience.  "The  Divine  I^aw,"  says 
Cardinal  Gousset,  "  is  the  supreme  rule  of  actions;  our  thoughts, 
desires,  words,  acts,  all  that  man  is,  is  subject  to  the  domain  of 
the  law  of  God ;  and  this  law  is  the  rule  of  our  conduct  by  means 
of  our  conscience.  Hence  it  is  never  lawful  to  go  against  our 
eonscience;  as  the  Fourth  Lateran  Council  says,  'Quidquid  fit 
contra  conscientiam,  aedificat  ad  gehennam.' " 

This,  I  know,  is  very  different  from  the  view  ordinarilj  tiflwn 
of  it,  both  by  the  science  and  literature,  and  by  the  public  opm- 
'  7 


74 


CaXflCIB^*CB. 


OONSGIEKCB. 


75 


Ion,  of  this  day.  II  It  founded  on  tlie  doctrino  that  oonsoience  k 
Iha  Toioe  of  Qod,  whoiMUi  it  is  fiishionable  on  all  hands  now  to 
oonttdoT  it  in  one  way  or  another  a  creation  of  man.  Of  oouree, 
there  are  great  and  broad  exceptions  to  this  statement  It  is  not 
true  of  many  or  moat  religious  bodies  of  men ;  especially  not  of 
ihair  teachers  and  ministers.  When  Anglloans,  Wesleyans,  the 
Yirions  Presbyterian  sects  in  Scotland,  and  other  denominations 
among  ns,  speftk  of  conscience,  they  mean  what  we  mean,  the 
▼oice  of  Ood  in  the  nature  and  heart  of  man,  is  distinct  from  the 
Toioe  of  Bevelation.  They  si>eak  of  a  principle  planted  within  na 
before  we  have  had  any  training,  though  sucn  training  and  ezpe- 
nance  is  necessary  for  its  strength,  growth,  and  due  formation. 
They  consider  it  a  constituent  element  of  the  mind,  as  our  per- 
ception of  other  ideas  may  be,  as  our  powers  of  reasoning,  as  our 
sense  of  order  and  the  beautiliil,  and  our  other  intellectual  en- 
dowments. They  consider  it,  as  Catholics  consider  it,  to  be  the 
internal  witness  of  both  the  existence  and  the  law  of  Qod.  They 
HiiiilL  it  holds  of  God,  and  not  of  man,  as  an  Angel  walking  on 
the  earth  would  be  no  citizen  or  dependent  of  the  Civil  Power. 
They  wouM  not  allow,  any  more  than  we  do,  that  it  could  be  re- 
■olfM  Into  any  eombination  of  principles  in  our  nature,  more  ele- 
moitary  than  itself;  nay,  though  It  may  be  called,  and  is,  a  law 
of  the  mind,  they  would  not  grant  that  it  was  nothing  more ;  I 
mean,  that  it  was  not  a  dictate,  nor  conveyed  the  notion  of  re- 
sponsibility, of  doty,  of  a  threat  and  a  promise,  with  a  vividness 
which  discriminated  it  from  all  other  constituents  of  our  nature. 

This,  at  least,  is  how  I  read  the  doctrine  of  Protestants  as  well 
as  of  Citholics.  The  rule  and  measure  of  duty  is  not  utility,  nor 
expedience,  nor  the  happiness  of  the  greatest  number,  nor  Stato 
convenience,  nor  fitness,  order,  and  the  pulchrum.  Conscience  is 
not  a  longsighted  selfishness,  nor  a  desire  to  be  consistent  with 
onewlC  but  it  is  a  messenger  from  Him,  who,  in  nature  and  in 
moo,  speaks  to  us  behind  a  veil,  and  teaches  and  rules  us  by 
Mit  renresentatives.  Conscience  is  the  aboriginal  Vicar  of  Christ, 
a  propnet  in  its  informations,  a  monarch  in  its  peremptoriness, 
a  priest  in  Its  blessings  and  anathemas,  and,  even  though  the 
eternal  priesthood  throughout  the  Church  could  cease  to  be,  in 
It  tho  aaoerdotal  principle  would  remain  and  would  have  a  swav. 

Words  such  as  these  are  idle  empty  verbiage  to  the  great  world 
of  philosophy  now.  All  thronsh  my  day  there  has  been  a  reso- 
liiie  wwiupe,  I  had  almost  said  conspiracy,  against  the  rights  of 
conscience,  as  I  have  described  ii  Xjiterature  and  science  have 
been  embodied  in  great  institutions  in  order  to  put  it  down. 
Hoble  bulMini^  have  been  reared  as  fortresses  against  that  spirit- 
ual, invisible  influence  which  is  too  subtle  for  science  ana  too 
prelbund  for  literature.  '  Chairs  in  Universities  have  been  made 
the  seats  of  an  antagonist  tradition.  Public  writers,  day  aller  day, 
have  indoctrinated  the  minds  of  innumerable  readers  with  theories 
subversive  of  its  claims.  As  in  Roman  times,  and  in  the  middle 
age,  its  supremacy  vras  assailed  by  the  arm  of  physical  force,  so 
BOW  the  intellect  is  put  in  operation  to  sap  the  foundations  of  a 
power  which  the  sword  coula  not  destroy.    We  are  told  that  con* 


science  is  but  a  twist  in  prhnitiTe  and  untutored  man;  that  its 
dictate  is  an  imagination;  that  the  very  notion  of  guiltiness, 
which  that  dictate  enforces,  is  simply  irrational,  for  how  can 
there  possibly  be  freedom  of  will,  how  can  there  be  consequent 
responsibility,  in  that  infinite  eternal  network  of  cause  and  effect, 
in  which  we  helplessly  lie  ?  and  what  retribution  have  we  to 
fear,  when  we  have  had  no  real  choice  to  do  good  or  evil  ?  ^ 

So  much  for  philosophers ;  n6w  let  us  see  what  is  the  notion  of 
conscience  in  this  day  in  the  popular  mind.  There,  no  more 
than  in  the  intellectual  world,  does  "conscience"  retain  the  oM, 
true,  Catholic  meaning  of  the  word.  There,  too,  the  idea,  the 
presence,  of  a  Moral  Ofovemor  is  far  awayfrom  the  use  of  it,  fire- 
mient  and  emphatic  as  that  use  of  it  is.  When  men  advocate  the 
rights  of  conscience,  they  in  no  sense  mean  the  rights  of  the 
Creator,  nor  tie  duty  to  Him,  in  thought  and  deed,  of  the 
creature;  but  the  right  of  thinking,  sneaking,  writing,  and  act- 
ing, accordinjz  to  their  judgment  or  their  humor,  without  any 
thought  of  God  at  all.  They  do  not  even  pretend  to  go  by 
any  poral  rule,  but  they  demand,  what  they  think  is  an  English- 
man's prerogative,  to  be  his  own  master  in  all  things,  and  to 
profess  what  he  pleases,  asking  no  one's  leave,  and  accounting 
priest  or  preacher,  speaker  or  writer,  unutterably  impertinent, 
who  dares  to  say  a  word  against  his  goin^  to  perdition,^  if  he 
like  it,  in  his  own  way.  Conscience  has  rights  oecause  it  has 
duties ;  but  in  this  age,  with  a  large  portion  of  the  public,  it  is 
the  very  right  and  freedom  of  conscience  to  dispense  with  con- 
science, to  Ignore  a  Lawgiver  and  Judge,  to  be  independent  of 
unseen  obligations.  It  becomes  a  license  to  take  up  any  or  no 
religion,  to  take  up  this  or  that  and  let  it  go  again,  to  go  to 
Church,  to  go  to  chapel,  to  boast  of  being  above  all  reli^ons,  and 
to  be  an  impartial  critic  of  each  of  them.  Conscience  is  a  stem 
monitor,  but  in  this  century  it  has  been  superseded  by  a  coun- 
terfeit, which  the  eighteen  centuries  prior  to  it  never  heard  of, 
and  could  not  have  mistaken  for  it,  if  they  had.  It  is  the  right 
of  self-will. 

And  now  I  shall  turn  aside  for  a  moment  to  show  how  it  is 
that  the  Popes  of  our  century  have  been  misunderstood  by  Eng- 
lish people,  as  if  they  really  were  speaking  against  conscience  in 
the  true  sense  of  the  word,  when  in  fact  they  were  speaking  against 
it  in  the  various  false  senses,  philosophical  or  popular,  which  in  this 
day  are  put  upon  the  word.  The  present  Pope,  in  his  Encyclical  of 
1864,  Quanta  curd,  speaks,  (as  will  come  before  us  in  the  next 
section,)  against  "liberty  of  conscience,"  and  he  refers  to  his 
predecessor,  Gregory  XVI.,  who,  in  his  Mir  art  t?o«,  calls  it  a 
"  deliramentum."  It  is  a  rule  in  formal  ecclesiastical  proceed- 
ings, as  I  shall  have  occasion  to  notice  lower  down,  when  books 
or  authors  are  condemned,  to  use  the  very  words  of  the  book  or 
author,  and  to  condemn  the  words  in  that  particular  sense  which 
they  have  in  their  context  and  their  drift,  not  in  the  literal,  not 
in  the  religious  sense,  such  as  the  Pope  might  recognize,  were 
they  in  another  book  or  author.  To  take  a  familiar  parallel, 
among  many  which   occur  daily:     Protestants   speak   of  the 


•I( 


CXIXtOII!f<nL 


"  BtteMd  Relbnnttioii ; "  CWhoHiw  too  tdk  of  "  ilie  BefomaHodT 
thoagii  Hiaydo  not  e»ll  it  blmsed.  T«t  mmj  "  wfomii^oii  •• 
might,  from  the  veiy  meftniiig  of  the  word,  to  06  good,  not  bad; 
80  that  Cfttholice  seem  to  be  implying  a  eiilo|^  on  an  e?ent  which, 
at  the  same  time,  they  oonaider  a  aarpossing  evil.  Here,  then, 
they  are  taking  the  word  and  nsinx  it  m  the  popular  sense  of  it, 
not  in  the  Catholic.  They  would"  say,  if  they  expressed  their 
fuU  meaning,  "the  to-col/ed  refonnation."  In  like  manner,  if 
the  Pope  condemned  "the  refonnation,"  it  would  be  utterly  so- 
phlatioal  to  say  in  conseqnenee  that  he  had  declared  himself 
agpunsl  all  reforms;  yet  diis  is  how  Mr.  Qladstone  treats  Mm, 
beemse  he  speaka  of  (so-called)  liberty  of  consoknce.  lb  make 
this  distinction  dear,  m,  between  the  CSatholio  sense  of  the  word 
"conscience,"  and  that  sense  in  which  the  Pope  condemns  it, 
we  find  in  the  Btcueit  dea  AlhmHmu,  ete.,  the  words  accompan- 
ied with  Quotatlon-niarka,  both  in  Pope  Gregory's  and  Pope  Pnis's 
Bnqyelicals.  thus:— Oregory's,  "Bx  hoc  putidis  simo  *indiiferw 
entismi*  fonte,"  (mind.  "  indifferentismi '^  is  under  onotation- 
marks,  because  the  Pope  wOl  not  make  himself  answerable  for  so 
unelassical  a  word)  "absurda  ilia  fluit  ac  erronea  sententia,  sen 
potiua  deliramentum,  aisetendam  esse  ac  yindicandam  enilibel 
•  libertatem  conscienti^r' "  And  that  of  Pius,  "  hand  timent  er- 
roneam  illam  fovere  opinlonem  a  Qregorio  XVI.  delirammitum 
ftnpellatam.  nimirum '  libertatem  oonscientin'  esse  proprium  cuiu^ 
ctnqne  hominis  ins."  Both  Popes  certainly  scoff  at  the  "  so-ealled 
liberty  of  conscience,"  but  there  is  no  scoffini  of  any  Pope,  in 
formal  dmniBentB  addressed  to  the  faithful  atlar^,  at  that  most 
ieiiipa  doctrine,  the  right  and  the  duty  of  following  that  Divine 
Authority,  the  voice  of  oonaoicnce,  on  which  in  truth  the  Church 

Ijlill'lUll m     I'fl    iltlllfc 

80  indeed  it  is ;  did  the  Pope  speak  against  Conscience  in  the 
true  sense  of  the  word,  he  would  commit  a  suicidal  act.  He 
would  be  cutting  the  ground  from  under  his  feet.  His  very  mis- 
sion is  to  prockim  the  moral  law,  and  to  protect  and  strengthen 
that  "  Light  which  enlighteneth  every  man  that  cometh  into  the 
WOtJd."  On tha law  of  coiscience  and  its  sacrcdness  arefounded 
boA  his  authority  in  theory  and  his  power  in  fiici  Whether 
this  or  that  particular  Pope  in  this  bad  world  always  kept  this 
ffmM  truth  in  view  in  all  he  did,  it  is  for  history  .to  tell.  I  am 
considetiMe  here  the  Papacy  in  its  office  and  its  duties,  and  in  re^ 
erence  to  those  who  acknowledge  its  claims.  They  are  not  bound 
Iq^  ft  Pope'spersonal  character  or  private  acts,  but  by  his  forsMl 
teaialting.  Tlius  viewing  his  position,  we  shall  find  tha*  it  is  by 
«ha  mniversal  sense  of  right  and  wrong,  the  consciousness  of 
transgression,  the  pangs  ofguilt,  and  the  dread  of  retribution,  as 
first  principles,  deeply  lodged  in  the  hearts  of  men,  thus  and  only 
thus,  that  he  has  gained  his  footing  in  the  worid  and  achieved 
his  success.  It  is  nis  claim  to  come  from  the  Divine  Lawriver, 
in  order  to  elicit,  protect,  and  enforce  those  tmths  which  AeXaw- 
givar  has  sown  in  our  very  nature — it  is  this  and  this  only — thai 
18  the  explanation  of  his  length  of  life  more  than  antediluvian. 
The  championship  of  the  Moral  Law  and  of  conscience  is  his 


OOHSODESrOE. 


77 


raCMm  £i$re.  The  fiwst  of  his  mission  is  the  answer  to  the  oom- 
nlaints  of  those  who  feel  the  insufficiency  of  the  Mjoral  li^t; 
•nd  the  insufficiency  of  that  light  is  the  justification  of  his  mission. 

All  sciences,  except  the  science  of  Religion,  have  their  cer- 
tainty in  themselves;  as  far  as  thej  are  sciences,  they  consist  of 
necessary  conclusions  fifom  undeniable  premises,  or  of  phenom- 
ena manipulated  into  general  truths  by  an  irresistible  induction. 
But  the  s'ense  of  right  and  wrong,  which  is  the  first  element  in 
reHinon,  is  so  delloate.  so  fitful,  so  easily  pujzled,  obscured,  per- 
Terted  so  subtle  in  its  argumentative  metoods,  so  impressible  by 
education,  so  biased  by  pride  and  passion,  w  unsteady  m  its 
fliirht,  that,  in  ib»  strug^e  for  existence  amid  various  exercises 
and  triumphs  of  the  human  intellect,  this  sense  is  at  once  the 
highest  of  aU  teaohers,  yet  the  least  luminous;  and  the  Church, 
the  Pope,  the  Hierarchy  are,  in  the  Divine  purpose,  the  supply  of 
ftn  urgent  demand.  Natural  ReUgion,  certain  as  are  its  grounds 
and  i£  doctrines  as  addressed  to  thoughtful,  serious  minds,  needs, 
in  order  that  it  may  speak  to  mankind  with  effect  and  subdue  the 
world,  to  be  sustained  and  completed  by  Revelation.  .  ^    , 

In  saying  all  of  this,  of  course  I  must  not  be  supposed  to  be 
Emiting  the  Revelation  of  which  the  Church  is  tbe  keeper  to  a 
mere  republication  of  the  Natural  Law;  but  sUU  it  is  true,  that, 
though  Revelation  is  so  distinct  from  the  teaching  of  nature  and 
beyond  it,  yet  it  is  not  independent  of  it,  nor  without  relations 
towards  it,  but  is  its  complement,  re-assertion,  issue,  embodiment, 
and  interpretation.  The  Pope,  who  comes  of  Revelation,  has  no 
jurisdiction  over  Nature.  If;  under  the  plea  of  his  revealed  pre- 
Foeatives,  he  neglected  his  mission  of  preaching  truth,  justice, 
mercy  and  peace,  much  more,  if  he  trampled  on  the  consciences 
of  his  subjects— if  he  had  done  so  all  along,  as  Protestants  say, 
then  he  could  not  have  lasted  all  these  many  centuries  Wl  iiow, 
io  as  to  be  made  the  mark  of  their  reprobation.  Dean  Milman 
has  told  us  above,  how  foithful  he  was  to  his  duty  m  the  medieval 
time,  and  how  successfiiL  Afterwards,  for  a  while  the  P^^ 
chair  was  filled  by  men.  who  gave  themselves  up  to  luxury,  se- 
curity, and  a  Pagan  kind  of  Christianity;  and  we  all  know  what 
a  moral  earthquake  was  the  consequence,  and  how  the  Church 
lost,  thereby,  and  hw  lost  to  this  day,  one-half  of  Europe.  The 
Popes  oould  not  have  recovered  from  so  tornble  a  cataetrophe,  as 
they  have  done,  had  they  not  returned  to  their  first  and  better 
ways,  and  the  grave  lesson  of  the  past  is  in  itself  the  guarantee 

of  the  future.  ,     , 

Such  is  the  relation  of  the  ecclesiaatical  power  to  the  human 
oonscience :— however,  another  view  may  be  taken  of  it.  It  may 
l)e  said  that  no  one  doubts  that  the  Pope^s  power  reste  on  those 
weaknesses  of  human  nature,  that  religious  sense,  which  in  an- 
cient days  Lucretius  noted  as  the  cause  of  the  worst  ills  of  our 
race;  that  he  uses  it  dexterously,  forming  under  shelter  of  it  a 
folse  code  of  morals  for  his  own  aggrandizement  and  tvrannv; 
and  that  thus  oonscience  becomes  his  creature  and  his  slava,  do- 
ing, aa  if  on  a  divine  sanction,  his  will ;  so  tiial  in  the  absteaet. 
kkimd,  and  in  idea  it  it  free,  but  never  free  in  foot,  never  M»  to 


iito  ft  iight  of  its  own,  indeponient  of  him,  ftny  more  than 
biida  whose  wings  are  clipped ;— moreover,  that,  if  it  were  able 
to  exert  a  will  of  its  own,  then  there  would  ensue  a  collision 
more  unmanageable  than  that  between  the  Church  and  the  State, 
as  being  in  one  and  4lie  same  subject  matter— viz.,  religion;  for 
what  would  become  of  the  Pope  s  "absolute  authority,"  as  Mr. 
Gladstone  calls  i%  if  the  private  conscience  had  an  absolute  au- 
thoritr  also  7 
1  wish  to  answer  this  important  objection  distinc%. 

1.  First,  I  am  using  the  word  ''consoienoe  "  in  the  high  sense 
in  which  I  have  alrei%  ezniained  it;  not  as  a  fancy  or  an  opin- 
ion, but  as  a  dutiful  obedienee  to  what  claims  to  be  a  divine 
voice,  speaking  within  us. 

2.  Secondly,  I  observe  that  conscience  is  not  a  judgment  upon, 
any  speouktive  truth,  any  abstract  doctrine,  but  bears  imme- 
diately on  conduct,  on  something  to  be  done  or  not  done.  "  Con- 
silience," says  St.  Thomas,  "  is  the  practical  judgment  or  dictate 
el  reason,  by  which  we  judge  what  Ate  ei  nunc  is  to  be  done  as 
beii^  good,  or  to  be  avoided  as  evil."  Hence  conscience  can  not 
come  into  direct  collision  with  the  Church's  or  the  Pope's  in- 
faUibiliiy ;  which  is  enga^  only  on  general  propositions,  or  the 
eondenination  of  propositions  simply  particular. 

3.  Wext,  1  observe  that,  conscience  being  a  practical  dictate,  ft 
eoiisiiin  is  possible  between  it  and  the  Pope's  authority  only 
when  the  Po^  legislates,  or  gives  particular  orders,  and  the  like. 
But  a  Pope  is  not  infallible  in  his  laws,  nor  in  his  commands, 
nor  in  his  acts  of  state,  nor  in  his  administration,  nor  in  his 
publio  policy.  Let  it  be  observed  that  the  Vatican  Council  has 
fell  him  just  as  it  found  him  here.  Mr.  Qladstone's  language  on 
this  point  is  to  me  quite  unintelligible.  Why,  instead  of  using 
vague  terms,  does  he  not  point  out  precisely  the  very  words  by 
whieh  the  Council  has  made  the  Pope  in  his  acte  infallible  7    In- 

then 

come  acts  of  excommunication,  as  if  the  Pope  could  not  make 
mistakes  in  this  field  of  action.  He  says,  p.  35,  "It  may  be 
sought  to  plead  that  the  Pope  does  not  propose  to  invade  the 
country,  to  seize  Woolwich,  or  bum  Portsmouth.  He  vrill  only, 
at  the  worst,  excommunicate  opponents.  ...  Is  this  a  good 
answer  7  Alter  all,  even  in  the  Middle  Ages  it  was  not  by  the 
direct  action  of  fleets  and  armies  of  their  own  that  the  Popes 
contended  with  kings  who  were  relhustory;  it  was  mainly  by  in- 
terdicts," etc.  What  have  excommunication  and  interdict  to  do 
with  Infiinibility7  Was  St.  Peter  infallible  on  that  occasion  at 
Antloch  when  St  Paul  withstood  him  7  vras  Si  Victor  inMlible 
when  he  separated  Irom  his  communion  the  Asiatic  Churches  7 
or  liiberius  when  in  like  manner  he  excommunicated  Athanasius  7 
And.  to  come  to  later  times,  was  Gregory  XIII.,  when  he  had  a 
medal  struck  in  honor  of  the  Bartholomew  massacre  7  or  Paul 
IV.  in  his  conduct  towards  Elizabeth  7  or  Sextus  V.  when  he 
Milled  the  Armada?  or  Urban  YIII.  when  he  peneeuted  Qal- 


OONSGIENCB. 


n 


ileo7  No  Catholic  ever  pretends  that  these  Popes  were  inlallible 
in  these  acts.  Since  then  infellibility  alone  could  block  the  ex- 
ercise of  conscience,  and  ttee  Pope  is  not  infaUible  in  that  sub- 
ject-matter in  which  conscience  is  of  supreme  authority,  no  dead- 
lock, such  as  is  implied  in  the  objection  which  I  am  answering, 
^san  take  place  between  conscience  and  the  Pope. 

4.  But,  of  course,  I  have  to  say  again,  lest  I  should  be  mis- 
understood, that  when  I  speak  of  Conscience,  I  mean  conscience 
truly  so  called.    When  it  has  the  right  of  opposing  the  supreme, 
though  notinfeUible  Authority  of  the  Pope,  it  must  be  something 
more  than  that  miserable  counterfeit  which,  as  I  have  said  above, 
now  goes  by  the  name<    If  in  a  particular  case  it  is  to  be  taken 
as  a  sacred  and  sovereign  monitor,  its  dictate,  in  order  to  prevail 
■gainst  the  voice  of  the  Pope,  must  follow  upon  serious  thought, 
prayer,  and  all  available  means  of  arriving  at  a  right  judgment 
on  the  matter  in  question.    And  further,  obedience  to  the  Pope 
is  what  is  called  "in  possession;  "  that  is,  the  onus prohandi  of 
establishing  a  case  against  him  lies,  as  in  all  cases  of  exception, 
on  the  side  of  conscience.    Unless  a  man  is  able  to  say  to  him- 
self, as  in  the  presence  of  God,  that  he  must  not,  and  dare  not, 
act  upon  the  Papal  injunction,  he  is  bound  to  obey  it,  and  would 
commit  a  great  sin  in   disobeying  it.     PHmA  fade   it  is  his 
bounden  duty,  even  from  a  sentiment  of  loyalty,  to  believe  the 
Pope  right  and  to  act  accordingly.    He  must  vanquish  that  mean, 
ungenerous,  selfish,  vulgar  spirit  of  his  nature,  which,  at  the 
very  first  rumor  of  a  command,  places  itself  in  opposition  to  the 
Superior  who  gives  it,  asks  itself  whether  he  is  not  exceeding  his 
right,  and  rejoices,  in  a  moral  and  practical  matter,  to  commence 
with  skepticism.     He  must  have  no  willful  determination  to  ex- 
ercise  a  right  of  thinking,  saying,  doing  just  what  he  pleases,  the 
question  of  truth  and  folsehood,  right  and  wrong,  the  duty  if 
possible  of  obedience,  the  love  of  speaking  as  his  Head  speaks, 
and  of  standing  in  all  cases  on  his  Head's  side,  bein^  simply  dw- 
caided.     If  this  necessary  rule  were  observed,  collisions  between 
the  Pope's  authority  and  the  authority  of  conscience  would  be 
very  rare.    On  the  other  hand,  in  the  feet  that,  after  all,  in  ex- 
traordinary cases,  the  conscience  of  each  individual  is  free,  we 
have  a  safeguard  and  security,  were  security  necessary  (which  is 
a  most  gratuitous  supposition),  that  no  Pope  ever  will  be  able, 
18  the  objection  supposes,  to  create  a  fiJse  conscience  for  his  ovm 

Now,  I  shall  end  this  part  of  the  subject,  for  I  have  not  done 
with  it  altogether,  by  appealing  to  various  of  our  theologians  in 
evidence  that,  in  what  I  have  been  saying,  I  have  not  misrepre- 
sented Catholic  doctrine  on  these  important  points. 

That  is,  on  the  duty  of  obeying  our  conscience  at  all  hazards. 

I  have  already  quoted  the  words  which  Cardinal  Gousset  has 
adduced  from  me  Fourth  Lateran:  that  "He  who  acts  against 
his  conscience  loses  his  soul."  This  dictum  is  brought  out  with 
lingular  fullness  and  force  in  the  moral  treatises  of  theologians. 
The  celebrated  school  known  as  the  Sahnanticenses,  or  Carmel- 
ites of  Salamanca,  lays  down  the  broad  proposition,  that  con- 


m 


MitipM  is  CTer  to  be  obeyed  whether  it  tells  truly  or  erroneously, 
ftni  Hmt,  whether  the  error  is  the  &ult  of  the  ^rsun  thus  erring 
or  not*  They  say  that  this  opinion  is  certain,  and  refer,  as 
agreeing  with  them,  to  St  Thomas,  St.  BonaTentura,  Caietan, 
Yasques,  Burandas,  K&Tarrus,  Corduba,  Layman,  Escobar,  and 
fMurieen  others.  Two  of  them  even  say  this  opinion  is  dc  fide* 
Of  course  if  he  is  culpable  in  being  in  error,  which  he  would 
liave  escaped,  had  he  been  more  in  earnest,  for  that  error  he  it 
aniwerable  to  Qod,  but  still  he  must  act  aooording  to  that  error, 
while  he  is  in  it,  because  he  in  full  sincerity  thiola  the  errof  to 
bO'  truth. 

Thus,  if  the  Pope  told  the  Endish  Bishops  to  order  their 
priests  to  stir  themselTes  energetically  in  faTor  of  teetotalism,  and 
a  particular  priest  was  fully  persuaded  that  abstinence  from 
win%  etc.,  was  practicailr  a  Gnostic  error,  and  therefore  felt  he 
colli  not  so  exert  himself  without  sin ;  or  sunpose  there  was  a 
FajNd  Older  to  hold  lotteries  in  each  mission  tor  some  religious 
oljieet,  and  a  priest  could  say  in  God's  si^ht  that  he  belicTea  lot- 
itnes  to  be  morally  wrong,  that  priest  in  either  of  these  cases 
wouM  commit  a  sin  hie  et  nunc  it  be  obeyed  the  Pope,  whether 
he  was  right  or  wrong  in  his  opinion,  an(f,  if  wrong,  although  he 
had  not  taken  proper  pains  to  get  at  the  truth  of  the  matter. 

Busenbaum,  of  the  Society  of  Jesus,  whose  work  1  have  already 
had  occasion  to  notice,  writes  thus : — "A  heretic,  as  long  as  he 
judges  his  sect  to  be  more  or  equally  deserving  of  belief,  has  no 
obluation  to  believe  [in  the  Church.j"  And  he  continues* 
"  When  men  who  have  been  brought  up  in  heresy,  are  persuaded 
from  bo^^hood  that  we  impugn  and  attack  the  word  of  God,  that 
we  are  idolaters,  pestilent  aeceivers,  and  therefore  are  to  be 
ihianed  as  pestilences,  they  can  not,  while  this  persuasion  lasts, 
with  a  sale  conscience,  hear  us."-!  1,  p.  54. 
»  Antonio  Corduba,  a  Spanish  Franciscan,  states  the  doctrine 
with  still  more  point,  because  he  makes  mention  of  Superiors : 
"In  no  manner  is  it  lawful  to  act  against  conscience,  even  though 
a  Law,  or  a  Superior  commands  it.'  — De  ComHmL,  p.  138. 

And  the  French  Dominican,  Natalls  Alexander: — "If,  in  the 
judgment  of  conscience,  though  a  miitaken  conscience,  a  man  is 
persuaded  that  what  his  Superior  commands  is  displeasing  to 
God,  he  is  bound  not  to  obey.  — Theol.  t  2,  p.  32. 

The  word  "Superior"  certainly  includes  the  Pope;  but,  to 
bring  out  this  point  clearly,  Cardinal  Jacobatius  in  his  authorita- 
Hm  work  on  Councils,  which  is  contained  in  Labbe's  CoHection  of 
them,  introduces  the  Pope  by  name : — **  If  it  were  doubdnl,"  he 
says,  "  whether  a  precept  [of  the  Pope]  be  a  sin  or  not,  we  must 
determine  thus :— 4h«t,  if  he  to  whom  the  precept  is  addressed  has 
A  conscientious  sense  that  it  Is  a  sin  and  ii^ustice,  first  it  his  duly 


fHB  ENCYCLICAL  OF  1864. 


SI 


***  Aliqui  opinantur  quod  conscientla  erronea  non  oMIgat;  Se- 
enndam  sententiam,  et  cerlam.  asserentem  esse  peccatum  d»oordare 
4  ouBSeientiA  erronel,  invlndbili  ant  vindbili,  tenet  D.  Thomas ; 

?uem  sequuntur  omnea  Scholastld."— 7^heo<.  MomL  U  y.,  p.  12,  id. 
118. 


to  put  off  that  sense ;  but,  if  he  can  not,  nor  conform  himsdif  to 
the  judgment  of  the  Pope,  in  that  case  it  is  his  dufr^  to  follow 
his  own  private  conscience,  and  patiently  to  bear  it,  if  the  Pope 
punishes  him." — lib,  iv.,  p.  241.  ^ 

Would  it  not  be  well  for  Mr.  Gladstone  to  bring  passages  from 
our  recognized  authors  as  confirmatory  of  his  view  of  our  teach' 
ing,  as  those  which  I  have  quoted  are  destructive  of  it?  and  they 
must  be  passages  declaring,  not  only  that  the  Pope  is  ever  to  be 
obeyed,  but  that  there  are  no  exceptions  to  the  rule,  for  exceptions 
must  be  in  all  concrete  matters.  \ 

I  add  one  remark.  Certainly,  if  I  am  obliged  to  bring  reli^on 
into  after-dinner  toasts,  (which  indeed  does  not  seem  quite  th6 
thing)  I  shall  drink,— to  the  Pope,  if  you  please,— still,  to  Con- 
science first,  and  to  the  Pope  afterwards. 

2  6.  The  Enotcligal  of  1864. 

The  subject  of  Conscience  leads  us  to  the  Encyclical,  which  is 
one  of  the  special  objects  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  attack  j  and  to  do 
justice  to  it,  I  must,  as  in  other  sections,  begin  from  an  earlier 

date  than  1864.  ,         ,  ,. . 

Modern  Rome,  then,  is  not  the  only  place  where  the  traditions 
of  the  old  Empire,  its  principles,  provisions,  and  practices,  have 
been  held  in  honor;  they  have  been  retained,  tney  have  been 
maintained  in  substance,  as  the  basis  of  European  civilisation 
down  to  this  day,  and  notobly  among  ourselves.  In  the  Anglican 
establishment  the  king  took  the  place  of  the  Pope ;  but  the  Pope's 
principles  kept  possession.  When  the  Pope  was  ignored,  the  re- 
btions  between  Pope  and  king  were  ignored  too,  and  therefore 
we  had  nothing  to  do  any  more  with  the  old  Imperial  laws  which 
shaped  those  rehbtions ;  but  the  old  idea  of  a  Christian  Polity  was 
still  in  force.  It  was  a  first  principle  with  England  that  there 
was  one  true  religion,  that  it  was  inherited  from  on  earlier  time, 
that  it  came  of  direct  Revelation,  that  it  was  to  be  supported  to 
the  disadvantage,  to  say  the  least,  of  other  religions,  of  private 
judgment,  of  personal  conscience.  The  Puritans  held  these  prin- 
ciples as  firmly  as  the  school  of  Laud.  As  to  the  Scotch  Presby- 
terians, we  read  enough  about  them  in  the  pages  of  Mr.  Buckle. 
The  Stuarts  went,  but  still  their  principles  suffered  no  dethrone- 
ment; their  action  was  restrained,  but  they  were  still  in  foroe, 
when  this  century  opened. 

It  is  curious  to  see  now  strikingly  in  this  matter  the  proverb  has 
been  fulfilled,  "Out  of  sight,  out  of  mind."    Men  of  the  present 

Sneration,  born  in  the  new  civilisation,  are  shocked  to  witness  m 
e  abiding  Papal  system  the  words,  ways,  and  works  of  their 
grandfiithers.  In  my  own  lifetime  has  that  old  world  been  alive, 
and  has  gone  its  way.  Who  will  say  that  the  plea  of  conscienoe 
was  as  effectual,  sixty  years  ago,  as  it  is  now  in  Endand,  for  the 
toleration  of  every  sort  of  fancy  religion  ?  Had  the  Press  alwaji 
that  wonderful  elbow-room  which  it  has  now?  Might  puUio 
.gatherings  be  held,  and  speeches  made,  and  republicanism  avowed 


.t*ir,—  ■*rtaiii''E''iifftf'Uti»iiff€Lirtili»i.Ji'KJirf»n»i^^ 


IBB  mmimMMs  m  1864 

in  lh«  ^atm  ei  Hm  lig^nej,  as  m  possible  now  ?  Were  ibe  thor- 
oughfiures  oi>eii  to  monster  processions  at  that  date,  and  the  squares 
and  parks  at  the  meroy  of  Sunday  manifestations  ?  Ck>iild  savanU 
li  tiat  day  insinuate  what  their  hearers  mistook  for  atheism  in 
■eientiio  aesemblies»  and  artisans  practice  it  in  the  centers  of  po- 
itioal  action  T  CJonM  public  prints,  day  after  day,  or  week  alter 
week,  carry  on  a  war  a^nst  religion,  natural  and  revealed,  as  now 
ii  Wm  case?  No;  law  or  public  opinion  would  not  suffer  it;  we 
may  be  wiser  or  better  now,  but  we  were  then  m  the  wake  of  the 
Helf  Koman  Church,  and  had  been  so  from  the  time  of  the  Ke- 
Ibrmaiion.  We  were  faithful  to  the  tradition  of  fifteen  hundred 
years.  AH  this  was  called  Toryism,  and  men  gloried  in  the  name ; 
now  it  is  ealled  Popery  and  reviled. 

When  I  was  young  the  State  had  a  conscience,  and  the  Chief 
Jiallee  of  the  day  pronounced,  not  as  a  point  of  obsolete  law,  but 
as  an  ener^ic,  liTing  truth,  that  Christianity  was  the  law  of  the 
luMi  And  by  Christianity  was  meant  pretty  much  what  Bentham 
^  ealls  Church-of-Englandism,  its  cry  being  the  dinner  toast, "  Church 
and  kine."  Bkclratone,  though  ne  wrote  a  hundred  years  apo, 
was  heMt  I  believe,  as  an  authority,  on  the  state  of  the  law  in  this 
matter,  up  to  the  beginninjr  of  this  century.  On  the  supremacy 
of  Religion  he  writes  as  foUows,  that  is,  as  I  have  abridged  him 
for  my  purpose. 

•'Tme  beuef  of  a  ftitnre  slate  of  rewards  and  punishments,  eto., 
eto.,  .  .  .  these  are  the  mnd  foundation  of  all  judicial  oaths. 
AM  m|oral  evidence,  all  confidence  in  human  veracity^ust  be 
weakened  by  irreligion,  and  overthrown  by  infideli^.  Wherefore 
1^  alfronts  to  Christiani^,  or  endeavors  to  depreciate  its  efficacy, 
are  highly  deserving  of  nnman  punishmeni  It  was  enacted  by 
l^e  statute  of  William  III.  that  if  an^  person  educated  in,  and 
hminff  made  profession  of,  the  Christian  religion,  shall  by  wriV 
in^  printing,  teaching,  or  advised  speaking,  deny  the  Christian 
iwaon  to  be  true,  or  the  Holy  Scriptures  to  be  of  divine  author- 
■%^''  or  again  in  like  manner,  "  iiany  person  educated  in  the 
Cwistten  religion  shall  by  writing,  etc.,  deny  any  one  of  the  Per- 
sons of  the  Holy  Trinity  to  be  God,  or  maintain  that  there  are 
more  floii  than  one,  he  shall  on  the  first  offense  be  rendered  in- 
eapabto  to  hold  any  office  or  place  of  trust;  and  for  the  second, 
be  rendend  incapable  of  bringing  any  action,  being  guardian, 
executor,  lecatee,  or  purchaser  of  lands,  and  shall  suffisr  three 
jmm*  impnsonment  without  bail.    To  give  room,  however,  for 

aientance,  if,  within  four  months  after  the  first  conviction,  the 
inqnent  will  in  open  court  publicly  renounce  his  error,  he  is 
iisoliarged  for  that  once  from  all  disabilities." 

Again:  "Those  who  absent  themselves  from  the  divine  worship 
in  the  Established  Church,  through  total  irreliffion,  and  attend  the 
service  of  no  other  persuasion,  forfeit  one  snilling  to  the  poor 
ttery  Lord's  day  they  so  absent  tiiemselves,  and  £»)  to  the  king, 
if  lliey  continue  such  a  default  for  a  month  together.  And  if  they 
keen  any  inmate,  thus  irreligiously  disposed,  in  their  houses,  they 
fiirleil  »10  per  month." 

IMiior,  ne  lays  down  that  "xeviling  the  otdinanoes  of  the 


83 


nm  wsroYCLicAL  o»  1864. 


Chnrch  is  a  crime  of  a  much  grosser  nature  than  the  other  of 
conformity;  since  it  carries  with  it  the  utmost  indeeency,  arro- 
ffance,  and  ingratitude;— indecency,  by  setting  up  private  judgment 
in  opposition  to  public ;  arrogance,  by  treating  with  contempt  and 
rudeness  what  has  at  least  a  better  chance  to  be  ri^ht  than  the 
sinjgular  notions  of  any  particular  man ;  and  ingratitude,  by  de- 
nyug  that  indulgence  and  liberty  of  conscience  to  the  members 
of  the  national  Church,  which  the  retainers  to  every  petty  con- 
venticle enjoy." 

Once  more :  "  In  order  to  secure  the  Established  Church  a^i<^ 
perils  from  nonconformists  of  all  denominations,  infidels,  Turks, 
Jews,  heretics,  papists,  and  sectaries,  there  are  two  bulwarks 
erected,  called  the  Corporation  and  Test  Acts;  by  Ae  former,  no 
person  can  be  le^ly  elected  to  any  office  relating  to  the  govern- 
ment of  any  city  or  corporation,  unless,  within  a  twelvemonth  be- 
fore, he  has  received  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  accord- 
ing to  the  rites  of  the  Church  of  England;  .  .  the  other,  caUed 
the  Test  Act,  directs  all  officers,  civil  and  military,  to  make  the 
declaration  against  transubstantiation  within  six  months  after  ikeir 
admission,  and  also  within  the  same  time  to  receive  the  sacrament 
according  to  the  usage  of  the  Church  of  England."  The  same 
test  being  undergone  by  all  persons  who  desire  to  be  naturalised, 
the  Jews  also  were  excluded  from  the  privileges  of  Protestant 
churchmen.  , 

Laws,  such  as  these,  of  course  gave  a  tone  to  society,  to  aH 
classes,  high  and  low,  and  to  the  publications,  periodical  or  other, 
which  represented  public  opinion.  Dr.  Watson,  who  was  the  lib- 
eral prelate  of  his  day,  in  his  answer  to  Paine,  calls  him  (unless 
my  memory  betrays  me)  "  a  child  of  the  devil  and  an  enem^  of 
all  righteousness."  Cumberland,  a  man  of  the  world,  (here  again  I 
must  trust  to  the  memory  of  many  past  years)  reproaches  a  Jewisir 
writer  for  ingratitude  in  assailing,  as  ne  seems  to  have  done,  a 
tolerant  reliSous  establishment;  and  .Gibbon,  an  unbeliever,  feels 
himself  at  Bberty  to  look  down  on  Priestly,  whose  "Sooinian 
shield,"  he  says,  "has  been  repeatedly  pierced  by  the  mighty 
spear  of  Horsley,  and  whose  trumpet  of  sedition  may  at  length 
awake  the  magistrates  of  a  free  country."  ^  ^    ^ 

Such  was  the  position  of  free  opinion  and  dissenting  worship  m 
England  till  ouite  a  recent  era,  when  one  after  another  the  various 
disabilities  wnich  I  have  been  recounting,  and  many  others  be- 
sides, melted  away,  like  snow  at  spring-tide ;  and  we  all  wonder 
how  they  could  ever  have  been  in  force.  The  cause  of  this  great 
revolution  is  obvious,  and  its  effect  inevitable.  Though  I  profess 
to  be  an  admirer  of  the  principles  now  superseded,  in  theinselves, 
mixed  up  as  tiiey  were  wiUi  the  imperfections  and  evils  incident 
to  every  thing  human,  neverthele%8  I  say  frankly  I  do  not  see  how 
they  could  possibly  be  maintained  in  the  ascendant.  When  the 
intellect  is  cultivated,  it  is  as  certain  that  it  will  develop  into  a 
thousand  various  shapes,  as  that  infinite  hues  and  tints  and  shades 
of  color  will  be  reflected  from  the  earth's  surface,  when  the  sun- 
light touches  it;  and  in  matters  of  religion  the  more,  by  reason 
of  the  extreme  subtlety  and  abstruseness  of  the  mental  action 


""IW 


moTOUOAL  or  1864. 


%  wliiili  iiij  asA  dtlwiliMi.  Dmtng  Oie  ImI  eeventy  yms, 
iiil  one  olftM  of  the  ooBUBimltj,  Hien  aaotlier,  lias  Awakened  up 
U  ikmght  uid  opinion.  Their  nmltifonn  views  on  Musred  enb- 
jeeti  neoemacily  aftnted  and  found  expression  in  the  flOTeming 
Older.  The  state  in  past  time  had  a  oonseience;  George  the 
niiid  hsd  a  eooseienee;  bat  there  were  other  men  at  the  head 
nf  affurs  besides  him  with  consciences,  and  thej  spoke  for  f^n 
besidfls  thiiMilfes;  and  what  was  to  be  done,  if  he  could  not 
work  without  them,  and  they  oould  not  work  with  him,  as  itf 
as  leligioos  qosstiiwi  tame  up  at  the  Council-board?  This 
brought  on  a  dsad4osk  in  the  time  of  his  suoosssor.  The  min- 
istry of  the  day  could  not  agree  together  in  the  policy  or  justice 
•f  keeping  up  the  state  of  thinn  which  Blaekstone  describes. 
Tha  Slate  ou#it  to  hare  a  oonseienoe;  but  what  if  it  happen  to 
hsTe  half  a  dosen,  or  a  score,  or  a  hundred,  in  religious  matters, 
each  diierent  from  each.  I  think  Mr.  Gladstone  has  brought  out 
the  difficulties  of  the  situation  himself  in  his  Autobiography. 
Ho  garerninent  could  be  formed,  if  religious  unanimity  was  a  stfis 
fiHi  iMM.  What  then  was  to  be  done?  As  a  necessary  conse- 
iiiiance,  the  whole  theory  of  Toryiim,  hitherto  acted  on,  came  to 
pieees  and  west  the  way  of  ail  ilesh.  This  was  in  the  nature  of 
things.  Not  m  hundred  Popes  could  have  hindered  it.  unlMS 
Proridenee  interoosed  by  an  eiusion  of  divine  grace  on  the 
hearts  of  men,  wMoh  would  amount  to  a  miracle,  and  perhaps 
would  intorfero  with  humaa  responsibiUty.  The  Pope  has  de- 
mmmmi.  Hm  fltnJm—f  that  he  ought  to  come  to  terms  with 
'*  progress,  liberaism,  and  the  new  eivilization.'*  I  have  no 
thou^t  at  an  of  disputing  his  words.  I  leave  the  great  prob- 
lem to  the  futnro.  God  will  guide  other  Popes  to  act  when  Pius 
goes,  as  He  ss  guided  him.  l^o  one  can  dislike  the  democratic 
prinoiide  moro  wan  I  do.  No  one  mourns,  for  instance,  moro 
than  C  over  the  state  of  Oxford,  given  up,  alas!  to  "liberalism 
and  progress,"  to  the  forfeiture  of  her  great  medieval  motto, 
^'Bominus  illuminatio  mea,"  and  with  a  consequent  call  on  her 
to  go  to  Parliament  or  the  Heralds  Collegs  lor  a  new  one;  but 
what  can  we  do?  AU  I  know  is,  that  Toryism,  that  is,  loyaltf  to 
persons,  "  springs  immortal  in  the  human  breast; "  that  Keli«ion 
m  a  spiritual  loyalty ;  and  that  Catholieity  is  the  only  divine  form 
of  B^igion.  And  thus,  in  centuries  to  come,  there  msy  be  found 
out  some  way  of  uniting  what  is  free  in  the  new  siruoturo  of  so- 
eiaty  with  what  is  authoritative  in  the  old,  wiiiout  any  base  com- 
.mromise  with  "Progress"  and  " Iiiberali.sm. ' 

But  to  return :— I  have  noticed  the  great  revolution  in  the  state 
of  tha  Law  which  has  taken  plaoe  since  1S28  for  this  reason:— 
la  aimest  that  Englishmen,  who  within  ifty  vears  kept  up  the 
Pope's  system,  aie  not  exactly  the  parties  to  throw  stones  at  the 
Pope  for  keeping  it  up  still. 

But  I  go  further :— in  fact  the  Pope  has  not  said  on  this  snbiect 
of  oonseience  (for  that  is  the  main  subject  in  question)  what  Mr. 
mwialone  makes  him  say.  On  this  point  I  desiderate  that  fair^ 
iMsa  in  his  Pamphlet  which  we  have  a  right  to  expect  fr«m  him ; 
ftiid  in  tnth  hw  ualaifiiiss  is  wondsriul.    He  says  pp.  16,  10, 


TBM  EXCTCLIOAL  OP  1864. 


85 


te*  the  Holy  See  has  condemned  ^le  maintainen  of  "  the  Lfberfy 
of  the  Press,  of  conscience,  and  of  worship."  Again,  that  the 
"Pontiflf  has  condemned  free  speech,  free  writing,  a  free  press, 
toleration  of  nonconformity,  liberty  of.  conscience,  p.  42.  Now, 
is  not  this  accusation  of  a  very  wholesale  character?  Who 
wouM  not  understand  it  to  mean  that  the  Pope  had  pronounced  a 
universal  anathema  against  all  these  liberties  in  toto,  and  that 
Bnglish  law,  on  the  contrary,  allowed  those  liberties  in  ioto, 
which  the  Pope  had  condemned?  But  the  Pope  has  done  no 
such  thing.  The  real  question  is  in  what  respect,  in  what  meas- 
nro,  has  he  spoken  against  liberty:  the  grant  of  liberty  admits 
of  degrees.  Blaekstone  is  careful  to  show  how  much  more  liberty 
the  law  allowed  to  the  subject  in  his  day,  how  much  less  severo 
It  was  in  its  safeguards  against  abuse,  than  it  had  used  to  be ;  but 
he  never  pretends  that  it  is  conceivable  tiiat  liberty  should  have 
no  boundary  at  all.  The  very  idea  of  political  society  is  based 
upon  the  principle  that  each  member  of  it  gives  up  a  portion 
of  his  natural  liberty  for  advantages  which  are  ^eater  than  that 
liberty;  and  the  question  is,  whether  the  Pope,  m  any  act  of  his 
which  touches  us  Catholics,  in  any  ecclesiastical  or  theolo^cal 
statement  of  his,  has  propounded  any  principle,  doctrine,  or  vie^ 
which  is  not  carried  out  in  foct  at  this  time  in  British  courts  of 
law,  and  would  not  be  conceded  by  Blaekstone.  I  repeat,  the 
very  notion  of  human  society  is  a  relinquishment,  to  a  certain 
point,  of  the  liberty  of  its  members  individuallv,  for  the  sake  off 
a  common  security.  Would  it  be  fair  on  that  account  t6  say 
that  the  British  Constitution  condemns  all  liberty  of  conscience  in 

word  and  in  deed?  ,     .   ,  ,.^    .     i.  v  • 

We  Catholics,  on  our  part,  are  denied  liberty  of  our  religion 
by  English  law  in  various  ways,  but  we  do  not  complain,  because 
a  limit  must  be  put  to  even  innocent  liberties,  and  we  acquiesce 
in  it  for  the  socml  compensations  which  we  gain  on  the  whole. 
Our  school  boys  can  not  play  cricket  on  Sunday,  not  even  in  coun- 
try places,  for  fear  of  beine  taken  before  a  magistrate  and  fined. 
In  Scotland  we  can  not  pky  the  piano  on  Sundays,  much  less 
the  fiddle,  even  in  our  own  rooms.  I  have  had  before  now  a 
lawyer's  authority  for  saying  that  a  religious  procession  is  illegal 
even  within  our  own  premises.  Till  the  last  year  or  two  we 
could  not  call  our  Bishops  by  the  titles  which  our  Religion  gave 
them.  A  mandate  from  the  Home  Secretary  obliged  us  to  put 
off  our  cassocks  when  we  went  out  of  doors.  We  are  forced  to 
pay  rates  for  the  establishment  of  secuUir  schools  which  we  can 
not  use,  and  then  we  have  to  find  means  over  again  for  building 
schools  of  our  own.  Why,  is  not  all  this  as  much  an  outrage  on 
our  conscience  as  the  prohibition  upon  Protestants  at  Rome, 
Naples,  and  Malaga,  before  the  late  political  chan^—not  to 
hold  their  services  in  a  private,  or  in  the  ambassador  s  house,  or 
outside  the  walls,— but  to  flaunt  them  in  public  and  thereby  to 
irritate  the  natives  ?  Mr.  Gladstone  seems  to  think  it  is  monstrous 
for  the  Holy  See  to  sanction  such  a  prohibition.  If  so,  may  we 
^»*  ^^\\  ..»^»  k^m  f/t  «m\w%  fni>  iifl  in  KiFminfi^ham  "  the  free  exer* 


not  call 
obe 


»all  upon  him  to  gain  for  us  in  Birmingham  "  the 
of  our  religion,"  in  making  a  circuit  of  the  8tr< 


free  exer- 
streets  in  our 


86 


fHB  BKOTCLIOAL  OP  1864. 


Its,  and  oliaiittng  tlie  *'  Pange  lAmim^"  tad  the  prote«lioii 
^fUm  poHoe  aounst  the  mob  whioh  would  be  aiiro  to  fgmm  rooiid 
ii%— pirtioukrlj  since  we  are  English  born;  bat  the  P^rotestants 
St  llalai^  or  Napleis' were  foreigners.*  But  we  have  the  good 
■ense  neither  to  feel  it  a  hardship,  nor  to  protest  against  it  as  a 
grieTanoe. 

But  now  for  the  present  state  of  Bnglish  Law :— I  say  seriously 
Mr.  Gladstone's  aocasation  of  us  aiails  quite  as  maoh  against 
Blaekstone's  four  Tolunies,  against  kwa  in  general,  against  the 
social  oontraotk  as  against  the  Pope.  What  the  Pope  has  said,  I 
nil  show  presently:  first  let  us  see  what  the  statute  book  has  to 
leH  na  about  the  present  state  of  English  liberfy  of  speech,  of 
the  press,  and  of  worship. 

First,  as  to  public  s|M>aking  and  meetings  r-nio  we  allow  of 
fsditions  lansiiage,  or  of  insult  to  the  soveieign,  or  his  repre- 
ientatiTes?  Blackstone  says,  that  a  misprision  is  committed 
against  him  1^  speaking  or  writing  a^pnst  him,  cursing  or  wish- 
ii^  him  ill,  giving  out  scandalous  stories  concerning  him,  or  doing 
any  thing  that  may  tend  to  lessen  him  in  the  esteem  of  his  su^ 
jects,  may  weaken  his  government,  or  may  raise  jealousies  be- 
tween him  and  his  people."  Also  he  says,  that  "threatening 
and  reproachful  words  to  any  judge  sitting  in  the  Courts  "  involve 
"a  high  misprision,  and  have  been  punished  with  large  fines,  im- 
prisonment, and  corporal  punishment."  And  we  may  recollect 
quite  ktely  the  judges  of  the  Queen's  Bench  prohibited  public 
meetiiigs  and  speeches  which  had  for  their  object  the  issue  of  a 
ease  then  proceeding  in  Court 

Then,  again,  as  to  the  Press,  there  are  two  modes  of  bridling 
ii  one  before  the  printed  matter  is  published,  the  other  alter. 
The  former  is  the  method  of  censorship,  the  latter  that  of  the 
hiw  of  libel.  Each  is  a  restriction  on  the  liberty  of  the  Press. 
We  prefer  the  latter.  I  never  heard  it  said  that  the  law  of  libel 
was  of  a  mild  character;  and  I  never  heard  that  the  Pope,  in  any 
Brief  or  Rescript,  had  insisted  on  a  censorship. 

Ijas%,  liberty  of  worship;  as  to  the  Enghsh  restriction  of  it, 
we  have  had  a  notable  example  of  it  In  the  last  session  of  Par- 
liament, and  we  shall  have  still  more  edifying  illustrations  of  it 
in  the  next,  though  not  certainly  from  Mr.  Gladstone.  The  rit- 
ualistic party,  in  the  free  exercise  of  their  rights,  under  the 
shelter  of  the  Anglican  rubrics,  of  certain  of  the  Anglican  officcR, 
of  the  teaching  of  their  great  divines,  and  of  their  conscientious 
interpretation  of  their  Articles,  have,  at  their  own  expense,  built 
churches  for  worship  after  their  own  way;  and,  on  the  other 
hand.  Parliament  and  the  newspapers  are  attempting  to  put  them 
down,  not  so  much  because  they  are  acting  against  the  tradition 
and  the  law  of  the  Establishment,  but  because  of  the  national 
dislike  and  dread  of  the  principles  and  doctrines  which  their 
wofship  embodies. 

When  Mr.  Gladstone  has  a  right  to  say  broadly,  by  reason  of 

•  **  Homlnibus  illuc  immigrantibus. "  These  words  Mr.  Gladstone 
mdta,  also  he  translates  "  publicum  "  "  free,"  pp.  17, 1«. 


THE  BNCYCUCAL  Of  1864. 


87 


theM  restrictions,  that  British  law  and  the  British  people  con- 
demn the  maintaincrs  of  Uberty  of  conscience,  of  the  press,  and 
of  worship,  in  ioto,  then  may  he  sav  so  of  the  Encyclical,  or  ac- 
count of  tJaose  words  which  to  him  have  so  frightful  a  meaning. 
Now  then  let  us  see,  on  the  other  hand,  what  the  proposition 
is.  the  condemnation  of  which  leads  him  to  say,  that  the  Pope 
has  unrestrictedly  "  condemned  those  who  maintain  the  liber^ 
of  the  Press,  the  liberty  of  conscience  and  of  worship,  ajid  the 
Uberty  of  speech,''  P-  16,— has  "condemned  free  speech,  free 
writing,  and  a  free  press."  p.  42.     The  condemned  proposition 

iinAAks  AS  follows  l'^^ 

•ML  Liberty  of  conscience  and  worship,  is  the  inherent  right  of 
all  men.  2.  It  ought  to  be  proclaimed  in  every  rightly  constituted 
society.  3.  It  is  a  right  to  all  sorts  of  liberty  f omnimodam  hb- 
ertatem)  such,  that  it  ought  not  to  be  restrained  by  any  author- 
iW.  ecclesiastical  or  civil,  as  far  ss  public  speaking,  printing,  or 
any  other  public  manifestation  of  opinions  is  concerned. 

Now  is  there  any  government  on  earth  that  could  stand  the  strain 
of  such  a  doctrine  as  this?  It  starts  by  taking  for  granted  that 
there  are  certain  Rights  of  man ;  Mr.  Gladstone  so  considers,  1 
believe ;  but  other  deep  thinkers  of  the  day  are  quite  of  another 
opinion;  however,  if  the  doctrine  of  the  proposition  is  teue,  then 
the  right  of  conscience,  of  which  it  speaks,  being  inherent  in 
man.  is  of  universal  force— that  is,  all  over  the  world— also,  says 


states?  The  proposition  tells  us:  It  is  the  liberty  of  every 
one  to  givej?ttO/ic  utterance,  in  ever^  possible  shape,  by  every 
possible  channel,  without  any  let  or  hinderance  from  God  or  man, 
to  all  his  notions  whatsoever,* 

Which  of  the  two  in  this  matter  is  peremptorv  and  sweeping 
in  his  utterance,  the  author  of  this  thesis  himself;'  or  the  Pope 
who  has  condemned  what  he  has  uttered?  Who  is  it  who 
would  force  upon  the  world  a  universal?  All  that  the  Pope  has 
done  is  to  deny  a  universal,  and  what  a  universal  1  a  universal 
liberty  to  all  men  to  say  out  whatever  doctrines  they  may  hold 
by  preaching,  or  by  the  press,  uncurbed  by  church  or  civil  power. 
Does  not  this  bear  out  what  I  said  in  the  foregoing  section  of  the 
sense  in  which  Pope  Gregory  denied  a  "  liberty  of  conscience? 
It  is  a  liberty  of  self-will.  What  if  a  man's  conscience  embraces 
the  duty  of  regicide  ?  or  infanticide  ?  or  free  love?  You  may  say 
that  in  England  the  good  sense  of  the  nation  would  stifle  and  ex- 
tinguish such  atrocities.  True,  but  the  proposition  says  that  it 
is  the  very  right  of  every  one,  by  nature,  in  every  well  consti- 
tuted society.  If  so,  why  have  we  gagged  the  press  in  Ireland 
on  the  ground  of  its  being  seditious  ?    Why  is  not  India  brought 


•  "  Jus  civibus  inesse  ad  ommnwdam  libertatem,  nuM  vel  ecclesias- 
ticft  vel  civili  auctoritate  coarctandam,  quo  suos  conceptus  quoscunr 
que  sive  voce,  sive  typis,  sive  aliA  ratione,  paktmpubliceque  manif estare 
•c  declarare  valeant/' 


I 


88 


wiiUii  «li«  BrilM  MMMliMllon  f  It  weaf  a  Hglit  ftfiiliiM  for  ^ 
Pope  to  use,  wfeen  lie  emlli  smcli  a  doctrine  of  ooneoience  delirth 
niMlitifi:  of  all  oonoeifmble  abeordities  it  i«  the  wildest  and  most 
itapld.  Hat  Mr.  Gladstone  really  no  better  complaint  to  make 
aounat  iSk%  Pope's  condennalions  than  this? 

Perhaps  he  will  say,  Why  should  the  Pope  take  the  trouble  to 
eondemn  what  is  so  wild  T  But  he  does :  and  to  say  that  he  oon- 
iilliis  somethiniE  which  he  doet  not  condemn,  and  then  to  inTeigh 
a^nst  him  on  3ie  ground  of  that  something  else,  is  neither  josl 
nor  logical. 

Vim  I  come  lo  the  Syllabus  of  "Errors,"  the  publication  of 
vMA  has  been  exclaimed  a^iinst  In  Bng^d  as  such  singular 
enormity,  and  especially  by  Mr.  Gladstone.  The  condemnation 
of  theological  statements  which  militate  against  the  Gatholio 
Faith  is  of  long  usage  in  the  Church.  Such  was  the  condemna- 
Im  of  the  heresies  of  Wickliffe  in  the  Council  of  Constance; 
Buch  those  of  Hubs,  of  Luther,  of  Baius,  of  Jansenius;  such  the 
ooniMnMilions  which  were  published  by  Sextus  IV.,  Innocent 
Xl,  aement  XI.,  Benedict  XIV.,  and  other  Popes.  Such  con- 
demnations  are  no  invention  of  Pius  IX.  The  Syllabus  is  a  col- 
lection of  such  erroneouf  propositions,  as  h«  has  condemned 
during  his  Pontificate;  there  are  80  of  them. 

The  word  "Syllabus"  means  a  collection;  the  French  translar 
tion  calls  it  a  "  Bimmi; "  a  ooUection  of  what?  I  have  already 
•aid,  of  propoeitiona,— piopoiitionswiiich  the  Pope  in  his  various 
Alocutions,  Encyclicals,  and  like  documents,  since  he  has  been 
Pope,  has  pronounced  to  be  Errors.  Who  gathered  the  proposi- 
tions out  of  these  Papal  documents,  and  put  them  together  in 
one?  We  do  not  know;  all  we  know  is  that,  by  the  Pope's  com- 
mand, this  collection  of  Errors  was  sent  by  his  Foreign  Minister 
to  the  Bishops.  He,  Cardinal  Antonelli.  sent  to  them  at  the  same 
lime  the  Encyclical  of  December,  1864,  which  is  a  document  of  dog- 
matie  anthority.  The  Cardinal  says,  in  his  circuhir  to  them, 
that  the  Pope  ordered  him  to  do  so.  The  Pope  thought,  he  says, 
that  perhaps  the  Bishops  had  not  seen  some  of  his  Allocutions, 
and  other  authoritative  letters  and  speeches  of  past  years;  in 
consequence  the  Pope  had  had  the  Errors  which,  at  one  time  or 
other  he  had  therein  condemned,  brougbt  t<^ther  into  one,  and 
Uml  for  the  use  of  the  Bishops. 

Such  is  the  Syllabus  and  its  object  There  is  not  a  word  in  it 
of  the  Pope's  own  writing;  there  is  nothing  in  it  at  all  but  the 
Erroneous  Propositions  memselves— that  is,  except  the  heading, 
"A  Syllabus,  oontahaing  the  principal  Errors  of  our  times,  which 
are  noted  in  the  Conslstorial  Allocutions,  in  the  Bncvclicals,  and 
In  other  Apostolical  Letters  of  our  most  Holy  Lord,  Pope  Pius 
IX."  There  is  one  other  addition— vif.,  after  each  proposition 
a  reference  is  eiven  to  the  Allocution,  Encyclical,  or  other  docu- 
ment In  which  it  is  condemned. 
The  Syllabus,  then,  is  to  be  received  with  profound  submission, 


THE  8TLLAB!». 


89 


as  having  been  sent  by  the  Pope's  authority  to  theBishops  of  the 
world  It  certainly  has  indirectly  his  extrinsic  sanction ;  but  m- 
trinsicallv,  and  viewed  in  itself,  it  is  nothing  more  than  a  digest 
of  certain  Errors  made  by  an  anonymous  writer.  There  would 
be  nothing  on  the  face  of  it,  to  show  that  the  Pope  had  ever  seen 
it  pace  by  page,  unless  the  "Imprimatur  implied  in  the  Car- 
dinal's letter  had  been  an  evidence  of  this.  It  has  no  mark  or 
seal  put  upon  it  which  gives  it  a  direct  relation  to  the  Pone. 
Who  18  its  author?  Some  select  theologian  or  high  official  doubt- 
less ;  can  it  be  Cardinal  Antonelli  himself?  No  surely :  anyhow  ^ 
it  is  not  the  Pope,  and  I  do  not  see  my  way  to  accept  it  for  what 
it  is  not  I  do  not  speak  as  if  I  had  any  difficulty  m  recognizing 
and  condemning  the  Errors  which  it  catalogues,  did  the  Pope 
himself  bid  me ;  but  he  has  not  as  yet  done  so,  and  he  can  not 
delegate  his  Magistenum  to  another.  I  wish  with  St.  Jerome  to 
"  speak  with  the  Successor  of  the  Fisherman  and  the  Disciple 
of  the  Cross."  I  assent  to  that  which  the  Pope  propounds  in 
faith  and  morals,  but  it  must  be  he  speaking  officially,  personaUy, 
and  immediately,  and  not  any  one  else,  who  has  a  hold  over  me. 
The  Syllabus  is  not  an  official  act,  because  it  is  not  signed,  for 
instance,  with  "  Datum  Romae,  Pius  P.  P.  IX.,"  or  "  sub  annulo 
Piscatoris,"  or  in  some  other  way;  it  is  not  a  personaJ,  for  ho 
does  not  address  his  "Venerabiles  Fratres,  or  "Dilecto  FiUo, 
or  speak  as  "  Pius  Bpiscopus ; "  it  is  not  an  immediate,  for  it 
comes  to  the  Bishops  only   through  the  Cardinal  Minister  of 

State.  ,      , 

If,  indeed,  the  Pope  should  ever  make  that  anonymous  compi- 
lation directly  his  own,  then  of  course  I  should  bow  to  it  and  ac- 
cept it  as  strictly  his.     He  might  have  done  so ;  he  might  do  so 
still  •  again,  he  might  issue  a  fresh  list  of  Propositions  in  addition, 
and 'pronounce  them  to  be  Errors,  and  I  should  take  that  con- 
demnation to  be  of  dogmatic  authority,  because  I  believe  him  ap- 
pointed by  his  Divine  Master  to  determine  in  the  detail  of  faith 
and  morals  what  is  true  and  what  is  false     But  such  an  act  of 
his  he  would  formally  authenticate ;  he  would  speak  m  his  own 
name,  as  Leo  X.  or  Innocent  XI.  did,  by  Bull  or  Letter  Apostolic. 
Or   if  he  wished  to  speak  less  authoritatively,  he  would  speak 
through  a  Sacred  Congregation ;  but  the  Svllabus  makes  no  claim 
to  be  acknowledged  as  the  word  of  the  Pope.     Moreover,  if  the 
Pope  drew  up  that  catalogue,  as  it  may  be  called,  he  would  dis- 
criminate the  errors  one  from  another,  for  they  greatly  diffisr  m 
gravity,  and  he  would  guard  against  seeming  to  say  that  all  mtel^ 
lectual  faults  are  equal.     What  gives  cogency  to  this  remark  is, 
that  a  certain  number  of  Bishops  and  theologians,  when  a  Sylla- 
bus was  in  contemplation,  did  wish  for  such  a  formal  act  on  the 
part  of  the  Pope,  and  in  consequence  they  drew  up  for  his  con- 
sideration the  sort  of  document  on  which,  if  he  so  willed,  ho 
might  suitably  stamja  his  infallible  sanction ;  but  he  did  not  acc^o 
to  meir  prayer.     This  composition  is  contained  in  the  "Recueil  des 
Allocumns*'  etc.,  and  is  far  more  than  a  mere  " collection  of 
errors."    It  is  headed,  "Theses  ad  Apostolicam  Sedem  delat» 
cum  censuris"  etc.,  and  each  error  from  first  to  last  has  the  ground 
8 


i 


I 


90 


no  SfLLABVS. 


of  ita  condemnation  mftrked  upon  it  TIi«w  ire  sixty-one  of 
mmk.  The  irat  is  "  impia.  iiyuriosa  leligloni,"  etc. ;  the  second 
IS  "  oompleiif 6  snmpta.  falsa,"  etc. ;  the  thiid  ilie  same;  the  fourth 
•rhutitifla,"  and  so  on,  the  epithets  affixed  hafii^  a  distinct  meanr 
iii|r  aad  denoting  various  degrees  of  error,  mch  a  document, 
wSkk»  the  Syllabus,  has  a  suhetantiTe  character. 

Here  I  am  led  to  interpoee  a  romark;— it  M  phun,  then,  that 
there  are  those  near,  or  with  access,  to  the  Hohr  Father,  who 
would,  if  they  could,  go  much  further  in  the  way  of  assertion  and 
oommaad,  than  the  IiTine  A»si9tenUa,  which  overshadows  him. 
wills  or  permits:  so  that  his  acts  and  his  words  on  doctrinal  sub- 
lets must  he  carefuUy  serutiniied  and  weighed,  before  we  can  be 
sure  what  really  he  has  said.    Utterances  which  must  be  received 
as  coming  from  an  Infallible  Voice  are  not  made  every  day,  mdeed 
they  are  very  rare ;  and  those  which  are  by  some  persons  affirmed 
or  assumed  to  be  such,  do  not  always  turn  out  what  they  are  said 
to  be;  nay.  even  such  as  are  really  dogmatic  must  be  read  by 
dtinite  rules  and  by  traditional  principles  of  interpretation,  which 
are  as  cogent  and  unchangeable  as  the  Pope  s  own  decisions 
themselves.    What  I  have  to  say  presenUy  will  illostrate  this 
truth;  meanwhile  I  use  the  circumstance  which  has  led  to  my 
mentioning  it,  for  another  purpose  here.     When  intelligence 
which  we  receive  from  Rome  startles  and  pains  us  f^om  its  seem- 
ingly harsh  or  extreme  character,  let  us  learn  to  have  some  little 
iith  and  patience,  and  not  take  for  granted  that  all  that  is  re- 
r-i)orted  is  the  truth.    There  are  those  who  wish  and  try  to  cany 
^   measures,  and  declare  they  have  carried,  when  they  have  not  car- 
ried them.    How  many  strong  things,  for  instance,  have  been  re- 
I    ported  with  a  sort  of  triumph  on  one  side  and  with  imtiibon 
^  and  despondency  on  the  other,  of  what  the  Vatican  Cou^il  has 
done;   whereas,  the    very  next  year  after  it,   Bishop  Fessler, 
the  Secretary  General  (»f  the  Council,  bnngs  out  his  work  on 
••  True  and  False  Infallibility,"*  reducing  what  wm  said  to  be  so 
monstsoiBi  to  its  true  dimensions.    When  I  see  all  this  going  on 
those  gitnd  lines  in  the  Greek  Tragedy  always  rise  to  my  lips: 

And  still  more  the  consolation  given  us  by  the  Divine  SpeiOcer. 
that  though  the  swelling  sea  is  so  threatening  to  look  at,  yet  there 
is  One  who  rules  it  and  says:  "Hitherto  shalt  thou  come  and  no 
further;  and  here  shaU  thy  proud  waves  be  stayed.  But  to  re- 
turn: the  Syllabus,  then,  has  no  dogmatic  force.  It  addresses  us 
not  in  its  separate  portions,  but  as  a  whole,  and  is  to  be  received 
from  the  Pope  by  an  act  of  obedience,  not  of  faith,  that  obedience 
being  shown  by  Uving  recourse  to  ^e  original  and  authonto^ve 
dociments,  (Allocutions  and  the  like.)  to  which  the  Syllabus 
pointedly  refers.  Moreover,  when  we  turn  to  those  documents 
which  are  authoritative,  we  find  the  SyUabus  can  not  .even  be 

■" ^  an  ceho  of  the  Apostolic  Voice;  for,  in  matters  in  which 


♦  Thia  History  of  tlie  Council  will  soon  be  publijilied  by  Bums, 

OateS' » 'iiO» 


THE  STLLABITS. 


91 


wording  is  so  important,,  it  is  not  an  exact  transcript  of 
the  words  of  the  Pope,  in  its  account  of  the  errors  con- 
demned,—just  as  would  be  natural  in  what  is  an  index  for  ref- 
erence. ,       c*   tt   t  »_    A  -m 

Mr.  Gladstone  indeed  wishes  to  unite  the  Syllabus  to  that  En- 
cyclical which  so  moved  him  in  December,  1864,  and  says  thafe 
tbe  Errors  noted  in  the  Syllabus  are  all  brought  under  the  infall- 
ible judgment  pronounced  on  certain  errors  specified  in  the  En- 
cyclical. This  is  an  untenable  assertion.  He  says  of  the  Pope 
and  of  the  Syllabus,  p.  20 :  "  These  are  not  mere  opinions  of  the 
Pope  himself,  nor  even  are  they  opinions  which  he  might  pator- 
naUy  recommend  to  the  pious  consideration  of  the  faithful. 
With  the  promulgation  of  his  opinions  is  unhappily  combined,  in 
the  Encyclical  Letter  which  virtually,  though  not  expressly,  iw 
eludes  the  whole,  a  command  to  all  his  spiritual  children  (from 
which  command  we,  the  disobedient  children,  are  in  no  way 
excluded)  to  hold  them"  and  he  appeals  in  proof  of  this  to  the 
language  of  the  Encyclical ;  but  let  us  see  what  that  language  is. 
The  Pope  speaks  thus,  as  Mr,  Gladstone  himself  quotes  him: 
"All  and  each  of  the  wrong  opinions  and  doctrines  specially 
mentioned  in  these  letters  We,  by  our  Apostolic  Authority,  repro- 
bate, proscribe,  and  condemn ;  and  it  is  our  will  and  command 
that  the  same  be  in  like  manner  held  reprobated,  proscribed,  and 
condemned  by  all  the  children  of  the  Catholic  Church."— Bncyc, 
Dec.  8,  1854.  He  says  as  plainly  as  words  can  speak  that  the 
wrong  opinions,  which  in  this  passage  he  condemns,  are  speci- 
fied m  the  Encyclical  and  not  outside  of  it;  and  when  we  look 
into  the  earlier  part,  there  are  about  ten  of  them.  There  is  not 
a  single  word  m  the  Encyclical  to  show  the  Pope  in  it  was 
alluding  to  the  Syllabus.  The  Syllabus  does  not  exist  so  far  as 
the  language  of  the  Encyclical  is  concerned.  This  gratuitous  as- 
sumption IS  marvelously  unfair,  and  the  only  connections  be- 
tween the  Syllabus  and  the  Encyclical  are  external  to  both— 
connections  of  time  and  organ — Cardinal  Antonelli  sending  them 
both  to  the  Bishops  with  the  introduction  of  one  and  the  same 
letter.  In  that  letter  he  speaks  to  the  Bishops  thus,  as  I  para- 
phrase his  words :  ♦—The  Holy  Father  sends  you  by  me  a  list, 
which  he  has  caused  to  be  drawn  up  and  printed,  of  the  errors 
which  he  has  in  various  formal  documents,  in  the  course  of  the 
last  eighteen  years,  condemned.  At  the  same  time,  and  with  tiiat 
list  of  errors,,  he  is  sending  you  a  new  Encyclical,  which  he  has 


*  His  actual  words  (abridged)  are  these :— "  Notre  T.  8. 8.  Pius  IX. 
n'a  jamais  cess6  de  proscrire  1«8  principales  erreursde  notre  tres-mal- 


youlu  que  Ton  r^digeat  un  Syllabus  de  ces  monies  erreurs,  destin^  k 
fttre  envoys  k  tou.s  les  Kvdques,  ete.  II  m'a  ensuite  ordonn6  de 
veiller  k  ce  que  ce  Syllabus  impriin^  filfc  envoys  a  V.  B.  R.  dans  ce 
temps  oil  le  m5me  Sbuverain  Pontife  a  jug6  \  propos  d'^crire  un 
autre  Lettre  Encyclique.  Ainsi,  je  m'empresse  d'envoyer  a  V.  E.  ce 
Byllabus  avcc  ces  Lettres." 


n 


■■laMMHI       Mian'   tt    A'l'tm 


t  TBS  8TLLABI7S. 


93 


f 


I  send 


judged  it  apropoB  to  write  to  the  Catholic  Biihops:- 

vou  both  at  ono©.  ,  ,   ,        •  .•     »      i 

The  SyUabu8,  then,  is  ft  Ust.  or  mther  an  index,  of  the  Pope  ■ 
Enofclical  or  Allocutional  condemnations,  an  index  rawoftw*,— 
mot^lphftbetioal,  afl  is  found,  for  instance,  in  Bellannines  or 
liinibertinri  works— drawn  up  hj  the  Pope  s  ordure,  out  of  hja 
paternal  care  for  the  flock  of  Christ,  and  conveyed  to  the  BiBH- 
ops  through  his  Minister  of  Stake.  But  we  can  no  more  accent 
it  as  de  fidey  as  a  dogmatic  document,  than  other  index  or  table 
of  contents.  Tiike  a  paraUel  case,  mutatis  mu tofidw ;  Counsel  s 
opinion  being  asked  on  a  point  of  kw,  he  goes  to  his  law-boolw. 
wites  down  his  answer,  and,  as  authority,  refers  his  cUen*  to  23 
eeoige  m..  c.  5,  s.  11 ;  11  Victoria,  c.  12,  s.  19,  and  to  Thomas 
».  Smith,  Attorney-General  u.  Roberts,  and  Jones  v.  Owen.  Who 
imSA  say  that  that  sheet  of  foolscap  had  force  of  law,  when  it 
was  nothing  more  than  a  list  of  references  to  the  Statutes  of 
the  Realm,  or  Judges'  decisions,  in  which  the  Law's  voice  really 

was  found?  ....         <.  «.  x   * 

The  value  of  the  Syllabus,  then,  lies  m  its  references ;  but  of 
these  Mr.  Gladstone  has  certainly  availed  himself  very  little. 
Yet  in  order  to  see  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  condemnation 
passed  on  any  proposition  of  the  SyUabus,  it  is  absolutely  neces- 
«ary  to  turn  out  the  passage  of  the  Allocution,  Ifinoyclicai,  or 
other  document,  in  which  the  condemnation  is  found;  for  the 
wording  of  the  errors  which  the  S? llabos  contains  is  to  be  inter- 
Iir«ted  by  its  references.  Instead  of  this  Mr.  Gladstone  uses 
forms  of  speech  about  the  Syllabus  which  only  excite  m  ino 
ftesh  wonder.  Indeed,  he  speaks  upon  these  ecclesiastical  sub- 
jects generally  in  a  style  in  which  priests  and  parsons  are  ac- 
cused by  their  enemies  of  speaking  concerning  geology.  For  m- 
stanee,  the  Syllabus,  as  we  have  seen,  is  a  list  or  index ;  but  he 
calls  it  "  extraordinary  declarations,"  p.  21.  How  can  a  lost  ot 
Errors  be  a  series  of  Pontifical  "  Declarations  ?  .  „  ^  , 

However,  perhaps  he  would  say  that,  m  speaking  of     1^0*^^ 
tions,"  he  was  referring  to  the  au^ritative  gtatements  which  I 
hftve  accused  him  of  neglecting.    With  all  my  heart ;  but  then 
lit  us  see  how  those  statements  Mill  the  character  he  gives  ot 
iiem.    He  calls  them  "  Extfimiinary  declarations  on  ijersonal 
and  private  duty."  p.  21,  and  "  stringent  condemnations,    p.  19. 
Now,  I  cenriily  must  grant  that  some  are  stnngent,  but  onlj 
tume.    One  of  the  most  severe  that  I  have  found  among  them  is 
that  in  the  Apostolic  Letter  of  June  10,  1851,  against  some  here- 
tli  uriflst  out  at  Lima,  whose  elaborate  work  in  six  volumes 
aipiigt  the  Curia  Romana,  is  pronounced  to  be  m  its  various 
Stents  scandalous,  rash,  false,  sehismatwMil,  injurious  to  tho 
BiMliftn  Pontifih  and  Ecumeniotl  Councils,  impious  and  hereti- 
cal."   It  well  deserved  to  be  i^led  by  these  names,  which  are 
pot  terms  of  abuse,  but  each  witli  its  definite  meaning;  and.  if 
Mr.  Gladstone,  in  speaking  of  the  condemoiions,  had  confined 
his  epithet  "stringent"  to  it,  no  one  would  have  complained  of 
him.    And  another  severe  condemnation  is  that  of  the  works  of 
Professor  Noytz.    But  let  us  turn  to  some  other  of  the  so-caUed 


condemnations,  in  order  to  ascertain  whether  they  answer  to  Ms 

^TtrlSS^^^^^^  16th  (the  7m  of  f  •; --- 

Propositions")  that.  "It  is  no  longer  expedient  that  ^^  Ca*o; 
Ho  fteligion  should  be  established  to  Ije  exclusion  of  «f  .o^J^w. 
When  we  turn  to  the  Allocution,  which  is  the  gf  oujid  of  its  ^ing 
put  into  the  SyUabus,  what  do  we  find  there  ?  First,  that  the  Pope 
Was  speaking,  not  of  States  universaUy.  but  of  ^'^^X'^'^f^^^^ 
Spain,  definitely  Spain ;  secondly,  he  was  not  speaking  of  the  prop- 
oiitio;  in  question  directiy ,  or  dogmatically,  or  fV^^}l;}^J^ 
protesting  against  the  breach  in  many  ways  ^[^^^'"'^'^^ 
the  part  of  tlie  Spanish  government;  further  that  he  was  not  re- 
ferrme  to  any  theological  work  containing  it,  nor  contempUtong 
any  proposition ;  nor,  on  the  other  hand,  using  any  word  of  con- 
demnatiSa  at  all.  nor  using  any  harsher  terms  of  tjie  Government 
in  question  than  those  of  "  his  wonder  and  bitterness.  And 
agafn,  taking,  the  Pope's  remonstrance  as  it  stands  is  it  any 
CTeat  cause  of  complaint  to  Endishmen,  who  so  lately  were  se- 
vere in  their  legislation  upon  IJnitenans,  Catholics,  unbelievers, 
and  others,  that  the  Pope  does  merely  not  think  it  expedient  for 
ererv  state  from  this  time  forth  to  tolerate  every  sort  of  feligwn 
on  its  territory,  and  to  disestablish  the  Church  at  once  ?  for  this 
is  all  that  he  denies.  As  in  the  instance  in  the  foregoing  section, 
he  does  but  deny  a  universal,  which  the  "erroneous  proposi- 
tion" asserts  without  any  explanation.  „ 

2.  Another  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  "  strineent  Condemnations  (hw 
18th)  is  that  of  the  Pope's  denial  of  the  proposition  that  the 
Roman  Pontiff  can  and  ought  to  come  to  terms  ^«^  .^.^g^"®^^ 
Liberalism,  and  the  new  (Sivilisation  "  I  turn  to  the  Allocution 
of  March  18, 1861,  and  find  there  no  formal  condemnation  of  this 
Proposition  at  all.  The  Allocution  is  a  long  arsfumeni  to  the  ef- 
fect that  the  moving  parties  in  that  Prowess,  Liberalism,  and 
new  Civilization,  make  use  of  it  so  seriously  to  the  injury  of  the 
Faith  and  the  Church,  that  it  is  both  out  of  the  power,  and  con- 
trary to  the  duty,  of  the  Pope  to  come  to  terns  with  them.  INor 
would  those  prime  movers  themselves  differ  from  him  here]  cer- 
tainly  in  this  country  it  is  the  common  cry  that  Liberalism  is  and 
will  be  the  Pope's  destruction,  and  they  wish  and  mean  it  so  to  be. 
This  Allocution  on  the  subject  is  at  once  beautiful,  dignified,  and 
touching :  and  I  can  not  conceive  how  Mr.  Gladstone  should  make 
stringency  his  one  characteristic  of  these  condemnations,  espe- 
cially when  after  all  there  is  here  no  condemnation  at  wL 

3.  Take,  again,  Mr.  Gladstone's  15th— "That  the  abolition  of 
Temporal  Power  of  the  Popedom  would  be  highly  advantageous 
to  the  Church."  Neither  can  I  find  in  the  Pope's  AUocutaon  any 
formal  condemnation  whatever  of  this  proposition,  much  less  a 
"stringent"  one.  Even  the  Syllabus  does  no  more  m  the  case 
of  any  one  of  the  eighty,  than  to  call  it  an  "  error; "  and  ^at  the 
Pope  himself  says  of  this  particular^error  is  only  this :—  >;^  can 
not  but  in  particular  warn  and  reprove  (monere  et  redarguere)  those 
who  applaud  the  decree  by  which  the  Roman  Pontiff  has  been 
despofled  of  all  the  honor  and  dignity  of  his  civil  rule,  and  assert 


fwii.  STIXABirB.   • 

/ 

Uttl  the  said  decree,  more  than  any  tl|ing  else,,  conduces  to  the 
llwf^  and  prosperity  of  the  Church  itsell"— ^^^.,  April  20. 1849. 

4.  %ke  another  of  his  instances,  the  17th,  the  "  error  '  that 
"  in  conntries  called  Catholic  the  public  exercise  of  other  religions 
»aj  laudably  he  allowed."  I  have  had  occasion  to  mention 
•IftMij  his  mode  of  handling  the  Latin  text  of  this  proposition— 
Til.,  rn^i  whereas  the  men  who  were  forbidden  the  public  exer- 
cise of  their  religion  were  foreigners,  who  had  no  right  to  be  in  n 
country  not  theur  own  at  all,  and  might  fairly  have  conditions 
impoied  upon  them  during  their  stay  there;  neyertheless  Mr. 
CUadtlone  (apparenUy  through  haste)  has  left  out  the  worda 
*' hominibus  lUuc  immigrantibns,"  on  which  so  much  turns. 
Hexl,  as  1  have  observed  above,  it  was  only  the  sufferance  of  their 
public  worship,  and  again  of  all  worships  whatsoever,  however 
many  and  various,  which  the  Pope  blamed;  further,  the  Popes 
words  did  not  apnly  to  all  States,  but  specially,  and,  aa  fiur  as  tho 
Allocution  goes,  deinitely,  to  New  Oranada. 

However,  the  point  I  wish  to  insist  u^n  here  is,  that  there 
vas  in  this  case  no  condemned  proposition  at  all,  but  it  was 
mtiily,  as  in  the  ease  of  Spain,  an  act  of  the  Government  which 
the  Pope  protested  agpunst  The  Pope  merely  told  that  govern- 
ment that  that  aot,  and  other  acts  which  tliev  had  committed,  gave 
him  very  great  pain ;  that  he  had  expected  better  thinss  of  them ; 
that  the  way  they  went  on  was  all  of  a  piece;  ana  they  had 
his  best  prayers.  Somehow,  it  seems  to  me  strange  for  any 
one  to  em  an  expostulation  like  this  one,  a  set  of  "  extraordinary 
declarations"  "  stringent  condemnations." 

I  am  ©onvinotd  that  the  more  the  proj^tions  and  the  refer- 
mum  mMmtd  in  the  SyUabus  are  exammed,  the  more  signaUy 
will  iio  oiafg*  break  doirn,  brought  aeamst  the  Pope  on  acca- 
Kion  of  it:  as  to  thoae  Propositions  which  Mr.  Gladstone  specially 
selects,  some  of  them  I  have  already  taken  in  hand,  and  but  few 
of  them  present  any  difficulty.  ^ 

5.  As  to  those  on  Marriage,  I  can  not  follow  Mr.  Gladstone  • 
meaning  here,  which  seems  to  me  verjr  confused,  and  it  would 
be  going  out  of  the  line  of  remark  which  I  have  traced  out  for 
myself,  (and  which  already  is  more  extended  than  I  could  wish), 
were  I  to  treat  of  them. 

6.  His  fourth  Error,  (taken  from  the  Encyclical)  that  "Papal 
judgments  and  decrees  may,  without  sin,  be  disobeyed  or  differed 
from."  is  a  denial  of  the  principle  of  Hooker's  celebrated  work 
on  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  and  would  be  condemned  bv  him  as  well 
as  by  the  Pope.  And  it  is  plain  to  common  sense  that  no  society 
can  stand  if  its  rules  are  disobeyed.  What  club  or  union  would 
not  expel  members  who  refused  so  to  be  bound  7 

T.  And  the  5th,*  8th,  and  9th   propositions  are   necessarily 

♦Father  Coleridge,  in  his  sermon  on  "The  Abomination  of  Deso- 
lation," observes  that,  whereas  Proposition  6th  speaks  of  "jura," 
Mr.  Gladstone  translate  *'  fW  jura?*  VId.  that  Sermon,  and  the 
"Month"  lor  December,  for  remarks  on  various  of  these  Proposi- 
tions; but  above  all  Mgr.  Dupanloupe's  woria  on  the  subjecti 
Messrs.  Bums  and  Oates^  1865. 


TBS  SYLLABUS. 


95 


«noi«,  if  the  Sketch  of  Church  Politer  drawn  out  in  former  sec- 
tions is  true,  and  are  necessarily  considered  as  such  by  those,  as 
the  Pope,  who  maintain  that  Poliiy.  .     ,   , 

a  The  l(Hh  Error,  as  others  which  I  have  noticed  above,  is  atinl- 
eersal  (that "  in  the  conflict  of  laws,  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  the  civil 
kw  should  prevail"),  and  the  Pope  does  but  deny  a  universal.    ^ 

9.  Mr.  Gladstones  llth,  which  I  do  not  quite  understand  in 
his  wording  of  it,  runs  thus :— "  CathoUcs  can  approve  of  that 
system  of  Mucation  for  youth  which  is  separated  from  the  Cath- 
olic faith  and  the  Church's  power,  and  which  regards  the  science 
only  of  physical  things,  and  the  outlines  (fines)  of  earthly  social 
life  alone  or  at  least  primarily."  How  is  this  not  an  "Error?" 
Surely  there  are  Englishmen  enough  who  protest  against  the 
elimination  of  religion  from  our  schools;  is  such  a  protest  so  dire 
an  offense  to  Mr.  Gladstone? 

10.  And  the  12th  Error  is  this:— That  "the  science  of  philoso- 
phy and  of  morals^  also  the  laws  of  the  State,  can  and  should 
Keep  dear  of  divine  and  ecclesiastical  authority."  This  too  will 
not  DC  any  thing  short  of  an  error  in  the  judgment  of  great  num- 
bers of  our  own  people.  Is  Benthamism  so  absolutely  the  Truth, 
that  the  Pope  is  to  be  denounced  because  he  has  not  yet  become 
a  convert  to  it? 

11.  There  are  only  two  of  the  condemnations  which  really  re- 
quire a  word  of  explanation;  I  have  already  referred  to  them. 
One  is  that  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  sixth  Proposition,  "Roman  Pon- 
tiff's and  Ecumenicid  Councils,  have  departed  from  the  limits  of 
their  power,  have  usurped  the  rights  of  Princes,  and  even  in  de- 
fining matters  of  faith  and  morals  have  erred."  These  words  are 
taken  from  the  Lima  Priest's  book.  We  have  to  see,  then,  what 
he  means  by  "the  Rights  of  Princes,"  for  the  proposition  is  con- 
demned in  kU  sense  of  the  word.  It  is  a  rule  or  the  Church  in 
the  condemnation  of  a  book  to  state  the  proposition  condemned 
in  the  words  of  the  book  itself,  without  the  Church  being  answer- 
able for  the  words  employed.*  I  have  already  referred  to  this 
rule  in  my  5th  section.  Now  this  Priest  included  among  the 
rights  of  Catholic  princes  that  of  deposing  Bishops  from  their 
sacred  Ministry,  of  determining  the  impediments  to  marriage,  of 
forming  Episcopal  sees,  and  of  being  free  from  Episcopal  au- 
thority in  spiritual  matters.  When,  then,  the  Proposition  is 
condemned  *•  that  Popes  had  usurped  the  rights  of  Princes ; "  what 
is  meant  is,  "  the  so^alled  rights  of  Princes,"  which  were  really 

*Propositione8,  de  quibus  Ecclesia  judicium  sunm  pronnnciat, 
doubus  i^rsesertim  modis  spectari  possunt,  vel  absolute  ac  in  se  ipsis, 
vel  relative  ad  sensum  libri  et  auctoris.  In  censurA  propositionis 
alicujus  auctoris  vel  libri,  Ecclesia  attendit  ad  sensum  ab  eo  intentum, 
qui  quidem  ex  verbis^  ex  tot&  doctrinse  ipsius  serie,  libri  textura  et 
confirmatione,  consiho,  institutoaue  elicitur.  l^ropositio  libri  vel 
auctoris  seguivoca  esse  potest,  duplicemque  habere  sensum,  rectum 
nnum  et  altenim  malum.  Vbi  cmitingit  Ecclesiam  propotUumes  hujug- 
modi  aequivocas  absque  prssvia  distinctione  settsuum  mtiigertj  censttra  unice 
eadii  in  tettsum  perversum  librivel  auctoris. — Tournely,  t.  2,  p.  170,  ed. 
1752. 


1  '::A 


I 


TSB  iTLLABUS. 


«li0  ririite  of  ilie  Clmfcli,  In  Mromiag  wUek  Hiero  waa  no  nrarpA- 

tfen  m  "dL 

12.  Tlio  other  propoaition,  Mr.  Gladstone's  seventh,  the  con- 
demnation of  which  requires  a  remark,  is  this :  "  The  Church 
has  not  the  power  to  employ  force  (vis  inferend»)  nor  an^  tem- 
poral power  direct  or  indirect."  This  is  one  of  a  series  of  Prop- 
ositions found  in  the  work  of  Professor  Nuyti.  entitled  "  Juris 
Bodottastioi  Institutiones,"  all  of  which  are  condemned  in  the 
BipO'a  Apostolic  Letter  of  August  22,  1851.  Now  here  "em- 
ploying force  "  is  not  the  Pope's  phrase  but  Professor  Nujti  s, 
ana  the  condemnation  is  meant  to  run  thus,  "  It  is  an  error  to  say, 
with  Profoswjr  Noyti,  that  what  he  calls  *  employing  force'  is  not 
allowable  to  the  Clinrch."  That  this  is  the  right  interpretation 
of  the  "  error  "  depends  of  course  on  a  knowledge  of  the  Profes- 
sor's work,  which  1  have  never  had  an  opportunifrjr  of  seeing; 
but  here  I  will  set  down  what  the  received  doctrine  of  the  Church 
is  on  ecclesiastical  punishments,  as  stated  in  a  work  of  the  high- 
est authority,  since  it  comes  to  us  with  letters  of  approval  from 
Gregory  XVI.  and  Pius  IX. 

"The  opinion,"  says  Cardinal  Soglia,  "that  the  coercive  power 
divinely  bestowed  upon  the  Church  consists  in  the  infliction  of 
spiritual  punishments  alone,  and  not  in  corporal  or  temporal, 
■eems  more  in  harmony  with  the  gentleness  of  the  Church. 
Accordingly  1  follow  their  judgment,  who  withdraw  from  the 
Church  the  corporal  sword,  by  which  the  bodv  is  destroyed  or 
blood  is  shed.  Pope  Nicholas  thus  writes :  •  The  Church  has  no 
■word  but  the  spiritual  She  does  not  kill,  but  gives  life,  hence 
that  well-known  saying,  "  Ecclesia  abhorret  a  sanguine."  But 
Ihe  Bitter  punishments,  though  temporal  and  corporal,  such  as 
shutting  up  in  a  monastery,  prison,  flogging,  and  others  of  the 
same  kmd,  short  of  effusion  oF  blood,  the  Churoh  jure  suo  can 
inflict'  "--(Institut  Jur.,  pp.  161,  9,  Paris.) 

And  the  Cardinal  quotes  the  words  of  Pleury,  "  The  Churoh 
has  enjoined  on  penitent  sinners  almsgivings,  fastings,  and  other 
corpoml  inflictions.  .  .  Aucustine  speaks  of  beating  with 
■tacfes,  as  sanctioned  by  the  Bishops,  after  the  manner  of  masters 
in  the  case  of  servants,  parents  in  the  case  of  children,  and 
schoolmasters  of  schokrs.  Abbots  flogged  monks  in  the  vray  of 
paternal  and  domestic  chastisement.  .  .  Imjorisonment  for 
mm%  time  or  for  life  is  mentioned  among  canonical  {>enances; 
priests  and  other  clerics,  who  had  been 'deposed  for  their  crimes, 
being  committed  to  prison  in  order  that  they  might  pass  the  time 
to  come  in  penance  for  their  crime,  which  thereby  was  with- 
drawn from  the  memory  of  the  public."         ,^    ^     .  ,  . , 

But  now  1  have  to  answer  one  question.  If  what  I  have  said 
is  Bubstentially  the  right  explanation  to  give  to  the  drift  and  con- 
tento  of  the  Syllabus,  have  not  I  to  account  for  its  making  so 
much  noise,  and  giving  such  deep  and  wide  oifonse  on  its  appear^ 
mmf  It  has  ahready  been  reprobated  by  the  voice  of  the  world. 
It  there  not,  then,  some  reason  at  the  bottom  of  the  aversion  felt 
by  educated  Europe  towaidf  it,  which  I  hare  not  mentioned? 


THE  SYLLABUS. 


97 


This  is  a  very  large  question  to  entertain,  too  large  for  this 
place;  but  1  will  say  one  word  upon  it. 

Doubtless  one  of  the  reasons  of  the  excitement  and  displeas- 
ure which  the  Syllabus  caused  and  causes  so  widely,  is  the  num- 
ber and  variety  of  the  propositions  marked  as  errors,  and  the 
■ystematic  arrangement  to  which  they  were  subjected.  So  large 
and  elaborate  a  work  struck  the  public  mind  as  a  new  law,  moral, 
social,  and  ecclesiastical,  which  was  to  be  the  foundation  of  a 
European  code,  and  the  beginning  of  a  new  world,  in  opposition 
to  the  social  principles  of  the  19th  century;  and  there  certainly 
were  persons  in  high  stations  who  encouraged  this  idea.  When 
this  belief  was  once  received,  it  became  the  interpretation  of  the 
whole  Syllabus  through  the  eighty  Propositions,  of  which  it  re- 
corded the  erroneousness;  as  if  they  were  all  portions  of  one 
great  scheme  of  aggression.  Then,  when  the  public  was 
definitely  directed  to  the  examination  of  these  Theses  damnatcc, 
their  drift  and  the  meaning  of  their  condemnation  was  sure  to 
be  mfsunderstood,  from  the  ignorance,  in  the  case  of  all  but  ec- 
clesiastics, of  the  nature  and  force  of  ecclesiastical  language. 
The  condemnations  had  been  published  in  the  Pope's  Encyclicals 
and  Allocutions  in  the  course  of  the  preceding  eighteen  years, 
and  no  one  had  fciken  any  notice  of  them ;  now,  when  they  were 
brought  all  together,  they  on  that  very  account  made  a  great  sen- 
sation. Next,  that  same  fact  seemed  in  itself  a  justification, 
with  minds  already  prejudiced,  for  exjjecting  in  each  of  them 
something  extraordinary,  and  even  hostile,  to  society  ;  and  then, 
again,  when  thev  were  examined  one  by  one,  certainly  their  real 
sense  was  often*not  obvious,  and  could  not  be,  to  the  intelligence 
of  laymen,  high  and  low,  educated  and  simple. 

Another  circumstance,  which  I  am  not  theologian  enough  to 
account  for,  is  this— that  the  wording  of  many  of  the  erroneous 
propositions,  as  they  are  drawn  up  in  the  Syllabus,  gives  an  ap- 
parent breadth  to  the  matter  condemned  which  is  not  found  in 
the  Pope's  own  words  in  his  Allocutions  and  Encyclicals.  Not 
that  really  there  is  any  difference  between  the  Pope's  words  and 
Cardinal  Antonelli's,  for  (as  I  have  shown  in  various  instances) 
what  the  former  says  in  the  concrete,  the  latter  does  but  repeat 
in  the  abstract;  or,  to  speak  logically,  when  the  Pope  enunciates 
as  true  the  particular  affirmative,  "  New  Granada  ought  to  keep 
up  the  establishment  of  the  Catholic  Religion,"  then  (since  its 
contradictory  is  necessarily  false)  the  Cardinal  declares,  "  To  say 
that  no  State  should  keep  up  the  establishment  of  the  Catholic 
Religion  is  an  error."  But  there  is  a  dignity  and  beauty  in  the 
Popos  own  language  which  the  Cardinal  s  abstract  Syllabus  can 
not  have,  and  this  gave  to  opponents  an  opportunity  to  declaim 
against  the  Pope,  which  opportunity  was  in  no  sense  afforded  by 
what  he  said  himself. 

Then,  again,  it  must  be  recollected,  in  connection  with  what  I 
have  said,  that  theology  is  a  science,  and  a  science  of  a  special 
kind;  its  reasoning,  its  method,  its  modes  of  expression,  and  its 
language  are  all  its  own.  Every  science  must  be  in  the  hands  of 
a  comparatively  few  persons — that  is,  of  those  who  have  made  it 
9 


p  i 


'H 


If 


'INK  sTuanra. 


THE   SYLLABUS. 


d9 


ft  stady.  The  courts  of  l«w  have  a  great  number  of  rules  m 
mod  measure  traditional ;  io  has  the  House  of  Commons,  and, 
judging  by  what  one  reads  in  the  public  prints,  men  must  have 
a  noviceship  there  before  tliey  can  be  at  perfect  ease  m  their  po- 
sition. In  like  manner  young  theologians,  and  still  more  those 
who  are  none,  are  sure  to  mistake  in  matters  of  detail;  indeed  a 
nally  irst-rate  theologian  is  rarely  to  be  found.  At  Kome  the 
rules  of  interofeting  authoritative  documents  are  known  with  a 
perfection  which  at  this  time  is  scarcely  to  be  found  elsewhere. 
«ome  of  those  rules,  indeed,  are  known  to  all  priests;  but  even 
this  general  knowledge  is  not  possessed  by  laymen,  much  less  by 
Protestants,  however  able  and  eiperienced  m  their  own  several 
lines  of  study  or  profession.  One  of  those  rules  1  have  had  sev-  - 
eral  times  occasion  to  mention.  In  the  censure  of  books,  which 
offend  against  doctrine  or  discipline,  it  is  a  common  rule  to  take 
■entences  out  of  them  in  the  author's  own  words,  whether  those 
words  are  in  themselves  gtxid  or  bad,  and  to  affix  some  note  of 
eondemnation  to  them  in  the  sense  in  which  they  occur  in  the 
book  in  question.  Thus  it  may  happen  that  even  what  seems  at 
irst  sight  a  true  statement,  is  condemned  for  being  made  the 
shelter  of  an  error;  for  instance:  "Faith  justifies  when  it 
works."  or  "  There  is  no  religion  where  there  is  no  charity," 
may  be  taken  in  a  good  sense;  but  each  proposition  is  con- 
demned in  Quesnell,  because  it  is  false  as  he  uses  it. 

A  further  illustration  of  the  necessity  of  a  scientific  education 
in  order  to  understand  the  value  of  Propositions,  is  afforded  bjr  a 
controversy  which  has  lately  gone  on  among  us  as  to  the  validity 
of  Abyssinian  Orders.  In  reply  to  a  document  urged  on  one 
side  of  the  question,  it  was  allowed  on  the  other,  that,  ''if  that 
document  was  to  be  read  in  the  same  wajr  as  we  should  read  any 
ordinary  judgment,  the  interpretation  which  had  been  given  to  it 
was  the  most  obvious  and  natural."  "  But  it  was  well  known/' 
it  was  said,  "  to  those  who  are  familiar  with  the  practical  work- 
ing of  such  decisions,  that  they  are  only  interpreted  with  safety 
in  the  light  of  certain  rules,  which  arise  out  of  what  is  called 
the  si^im  mrim.'*  And  then  some  of  these  rules  were  given; 
irstk  *'  that  to  understand  the  real  meaning  of  a  decision,  no 
matter  how  clearly  set  forth,  we  should  know  the  nature  of  the 
diilculty  or  dubium,  as  it  was  understood  by  the  tribunal  that 
had  to  decide  upon  it  Next,  nothing  but  the  direct  proposition, 
in  its  nudest  and  severest  sense,  as  distinguiMhed  from  indirect 
propositions,  the  gr»)unds  of  the  decision,  or  implied  statements, 
u  ruled  by  the  iudguient.  Also,  if  tlierc  is  any  thing  in  the 
wording  of  a  decision  which  appears  inconsistent  with  the  teach- 
ing of  an  improved  body  of  theologians,  etc.,  the  decision  is  to 
be  interpreted  so  as  to  leave  such  teaching  intact;"  and  so  on.* 
It  is  plain  that  the  \icw  thus  opened  upn  us  has  further  bear- 
inn  than  that  for  which  1  make  use  of  it  here. 

These  remarks  on  scientific  theology  apply  also  of  course  to  its 
language.    I  have  employed  myself  in  illustration  in  framing  a 

•Month,  Nov.  and  Dec,  1873. 


■entence,  which  would  be  plain  enough  to  any  priest,  but  I  think 
would  perplex  any  Protestant.  I  hope  it  is  not  of  too  light  a  char- 
acter to  iritroduce  here.  We  will  suppose,  then,  a  theologian  to 
write  as  follows :  "Holding,  as  we  do,  tbat  there  ib  only  materml 
sin  in  those  who,  being  invincibly  ignorant,  reject  the  truth 
therefore  in  charity  we  hope  that  they  have  the  future  portion  of 
formal  believers,  as  considering  that  by  virtue  of  their  good  faith, 
iough  not  of  the  body  of  the  faithful,  they  implicitly  and  tnter- 
pretatively  believe  what  they  seem  to  deny.' 

What  sense  would  this  statement  convey  to  the  mind  of  a  mem- 
ber of  some  Reformation  Society  or  Protestant  League  /  Ho 
would  read  it  as  foUows,  and  consider  it  all  the  more  insidious 
and  dangerous  for  its  being  so  very  unintelligible:  "Holding,  as 
we  do,  that  there  is  only  a  very  considerable  sm  in  those  who  re- 
ject the  truth  out  o£  contumacious  ignorance,  therefore  in  chanty 
we  hope  that  they  have  the  future  portion  of  nominal  Christians,  as 
considering,  that  by  the  excellence  of  their  living  faith,  though 
not  in  the  number  of  believers,  they  believe  without  any  hesita- 
tion, as  interpreters  [of  Scripture  ?]  what  they  seem  to  deny. 

Now,  consMiering  that  the  Syllabus  was  intended  for  4,he  Kish- 
ops  who  would  be  the  interpreters  of  it,  as  the  need  arose,  to 
their  people,  and  it  got  bodily  into  Endish  newspapers  even  before 
it  was  received  at  many  an  episcopal  residence,  we  shall  not  be 
surprised  at  the  commotion  which  accompanied  its  publication. 

1  have  spoken  of  the  causes  intrinsic  to  the  Syllabus,  which 
have  led  to  misunderstandings  about  it.     As  to  external,  I  can  be 
no  judge  myself  as  to  what  Catholics  who  have  means  of  know- 
ing are  very  decided  in  declaring,  the  tremendous  power  of  the 
Secret  Societies.     It  is  enough  to  have  suggested  here,  how  a 
wide-spread  organization  like  theirs  might  malign  and  frustrate 
the  most  beneficial  acts  of  the  Pope.     One  matter  I  had  mformar 
tion  of  myself  from  Rome  at  the  time  when  the  SyUabus  had  just 
been  published,  before  there  was  yet  time  to  ascertoin  how  it  _ 
would  be  taken  by  the  world  at  large.     Now,  the  Rock  ot  bt.    j 
Peter  on  its  summit  enjoys  a  pure  and  serene  atmosphere,  but 
there  is  a  great  deal  of  Roman  malaria  at  the  foot  of  it.     While     I 
'  the  Holy  Father  was  in  great  earnestness  and  charity  addressing  ^ 
the  Catholic  world  by  his  Cardinal  Minister,  there  were  circles  of 
light-minded  men  in  his  city  who  were  laying  bets  with  each  other 
whether  the  Syllabus  would  "  make  a  row  in  Europe     or  not. 
Of  course  it  was  the  interest  of  those  who  betted  on  the  affirma- 
tive side  to  represent  the  Pope's  act  to  the  greatest  ^»^a<^^*"**l?®J 
and  it  was  very  easy  to  kindle  a  flame  in  the  mass  of  English  and 
other  visiters  at  Rome  which,  with  a  very  little  nursing,  was  soon 
strong  enough  to  take  care  of  itself. 

g  8.  The  Vatican  Council. 

In  beginning  to  speak  of  the  Vatican  Council,  T  am  obliged 
from  circumstances  to  begin  by  speaking  of  myself.  The  m^t 
unfounded  and  erroneous  assertions  have  publicly  been  made 


101) 


THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


•liMit  my  seotimeiits  towards  it,  and  as  conldently  aa  they  are 
imfouiiilaii.  Only  a  few  weeks  nj^o  it  was  stated  categoricafly  by 
■01110  mtoiiyiiious  correspondent  of  a  Liverpool  paper,  with  refer- 
%mm  to  tlic  prospect  of  my  undertaking  the  taul  on  which  1  am 
now  employed,  that  it  was,  "  in  fact,  understood  that  at  one  time 
Br.  Newman  was  on  the  point  of  uniting  with  Dr.  Bollinger  and 
his  party,  and  that  it  required  the  earnest  persuasion  of  several 
members  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Episcopate  to  prevent  him  from 
taking  that  step," — an  unmitigated  and  most  ridiculous  untruth 
in  every  word  of  it,  nor  would  it  be  worth  while  to  notice  it  here, 
except  for  its  connection  with  the  subject  on  which  I  am  entering. 
But  the  explanation  of  such  reports  about  me  is  easy.  They 
arise  from  forgetfulness  on  the  part  of  those  who  spread  them, 
that  there  are  two  sides  of  ecclesiastical  acts,  that  right  ends  are 
often  prosecuted  by  very  unworthy  means,  andithat  in  consequence 
those  who,  like  myself,  oppose  a  mode  of  action,  are  not  necessar 
lilt  opposed  to  the  issue  tor  which  it  has  been  adopted.  Jacob 
cainea  by  wrong  means  his  destined  blessing.  "AH  are  not 
Israelites  who  are  of  Israel,"  and  there  are  partisans  of  Bome 
who  have  not  the  sancity  and  wisdom  of  Rome  herself 

I  am  not  referring  to  any  thing  which  took  place  within  the 
walls  of  the  Council  chambers ;  of  that  of  course  we  know  noth- 
ing; but  even  though  things  occurred  there  which  it  is  nol 
tj^asant  to  dwell  upon,  that  would  not  at  all  affect,  not  by  an 
hair's  breadth,  the  validity  of  the  resulting  definition,  as  I  shall 

{iresently  show.  What  1  felt  deeply,  and  ever  shall  feel,  while 
lie  laats,  is  the  violence  and  cruelty  of  journals  and  other  pub- 
lications, which,  taking  as  they  professed  to  do  the  Catholic  side, 
employed  themselves  bv  their  rash  language  (though  of  course, 
they  did  not  mean  it  so),  in  unsettling  the  weak  in  faith,  thn.w- 
ing  back  inquirers,  and  shocking  the  Protestant  mind.  Nor  do  I 
■seak  of  publications  only ;  a  feeling  was  too  prevalent  in  many 

E laces  that  no  one  could  be  true  to  God  and  His  Church,  who 
ad  any  pity  on  troubled  souls,  or  an^  scruple  of  "scandalizing 
those  little  ones  who  believe  in  "  Christ,  and  of  "  despising  and 
destroying  him  for  whom  He  died." 

II  was  Siis  most  keen  feeling  which  made  me  say,  as  I  did  con- 
tinually, "I  will  not  believe  tnat  the  Pope's  InfaUibility  will  be 
ieined,  till  defined  it  is." 

Moreover,  a  private  letter  of  mine  became  public  property. 
That  letter,  to  wliich  Mr.  Gladstone  has  referred  with  a  compli- 
ment to  mo  which  I  have  not  merited,  waa  one  of  the  most  con- 
fidential I  ever  wrote  in  my  life.  I  wrote  it  to  my  own  Bishop, 
under  a  deep  sense  of  the  responsibilitv  I  should  incur,  were  I 
mot  to  speak  out  to  him  my  wnole  mind.  I  put  the  matter  from 
me  when  I  had  said  my  say,  and  kept  no  proper  copy  of  the 
letter.  To  my  dismay  1  saw  it  in  the  public  prints :  to  this  day 
I  do  not  know,  nor  suspect,  how  it  |5ot  tnere.  1  can  not  withdraw 
it,  for  I  never  put  it  rorward,  so  it  will  remain  on  the  columns 
of  newspapers  whether  1  will  or  not ;  but  I  withdraw  it  as  far 
Bs  I  can,  by  declaring  that  it  was  never  meant  for  the  public  eye, 

1.  So  much  as  to  my  posture  of  mind  before  the  Befinition: 


THB  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


101 


now  I  will  set  down  how  I  felt  after  it.    On  July  24,  1870,  I 

wrote  as  follows:  i       j     x  v 

"  I  saw  the  new  definition  yesterday,  and  am  pleased  at  its 
moderation— that  is,  if  the  doctrine  in  question  is  to  be  defined 
at  all  The  terms  are  vague  and  comprehensive ;  and,  personally, 
I  have  no  difliculty  in  admitting  it.  The  question  is,  Boes  it  com© 
to  me  with  the  authority  of  an  Ecumenical  Council  ? 

"Now  the privid  facie  argument  is  in  favor  of  its  having  that 
authority.  The  Council  was  legitimately  called ;  it  was  more 
largely  attended  than  any  Council  before  it;  and  innumerable 
pr^ers  from  the  whole  of  Christendom,  have  preceded  and  at- 
tended it,  and  merited  a  happy  issue  of  its  proceedings. 

"  Were  it  not,  then,  for  certain  circumstances,  under  which  the 
Council  made  the  definition,  1  should  receive  that  definition  at 
once.  Even  as  it  is,  if  I  were  called  upon  to  profess  it,  I  »^^^l^ 
be  unable,  considering  it  came  from  the  Holy  Father  and  the 
competent  local  authorities,  at  once  to  refuse  to  do  so.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  can  not  be  denied  that  there  are  reasons  for  a 
Catholic,  till  better  informed,  to  suspend  his  judgment  on  its  var 

"  We  all  know  that  ever  since  the  opening  of  the  Council, 
there  has  been  a  strenuous  opposition  to  the  definition  of  the 
doctrine ;  and  that,  at  the  time  when  it  was  actually  passed, 
more  than  eighty  Fathers  absented  themselves  from  the  Council, 
and  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  its  act.  But,  if  the  fact  be 
so,  that  the  Fathers  were  not  unanimous,  is  the  definition  valid  . 
This  depends  on  the  question  whether  unanimity,  at  least  moral, 
is  or  is  not  necessary  for  its  validity?  As  at  present  advised  I 
think  it  is;  certainly  Pius  IV.  lays  great  stress  on  the  unanimity 
of  the  Fathers  in  the  Council  of  Trent:  'Qaibus  rebus  per- 
fectis,'  he  savS  in  his  Bull  of  Promulgation,  'concilium  tant&  07n^ 
nium  qui  Uli  interfaerunt  Concordia  peractum  fuit,  ut  consensum 
plane  a  Domino  effectum  esse  constiterit;  idque  in  nostris  atque 
omnium  oculis  valdc  mirabile  fuerit'  ,     ,      r^         •!  • 

"  Far  different  has  been  the  case  now,— though  the  Council  is 
not  yet  finished.  But,  if  I  must  now  at  once  decide  what  to 
think  of  it,  I  should  consider  that  all  turned  on  what  the  dissen- 
tient Bishops  now  do.  ,  u  j  •<? 
*'  If  they  separate  and  go  home  without  acting  as  a  body,  it 
they  act  only  individually,  or  as  individuals,  and  each  in  his  own 
way,  then  I  should  not  recognize  in  their  opposition  to  the  ma- 
jority that  force,  firmness,  and  unity  of  view,  which  creates  a 
real  case  of  want  of  moral  unanimity  in  the  Council.     ^ 

"  Again,  if  the  Council  continues  to  sit,  if  the  dissentient  Bish- 
ops more  or  less  take  part  in  it,  and  concur  in  its  acts ;  if  there 
is  a  new  Pope,  and  he  continues  the  policy  of  the  present;  and 
if  the  Council  terminates  without  any  reversal  or  modification  of 
the  definition,  or  any  effective  movement  against  it  on  the  part 
of  the  dissentients,  then  again  there  will  be  good  reason  for  say- 
ing that  the  want  of  a  moral  unanimity  has  not  been  made  out. 
"And  further,  if  the  definition  is  consistently  received  by  the 
whole  body  of  the  feithful,  as  valid,  or  as  the  expression  of  a 


i 


Ite 


nil  TATKJAif  cocxca. 


i 


•* 


i 


il 


•« 


trtitli,  then  too  it  will  claim  our  assent  l)jr  th©  fore©  of  the  great 
dietam:  'Securus  judicat  orbis  terramin. 

"This  indeed  ib  a  broad  principle  bj  which  all  acts  of  the 
rulers  of  the  Chorch  are  ratified.  Bat  for  it  we  might  reason- 
•bly  question  some  of  the  past  Councils  or  their  acts. 

llao  1  wrote  as  follows  to  a  friend,  who  was  troubled  at  the 
way  in  which  the  dogma  was  passed,  in  ortler  to  place  before  him 

iu  various  points  of  view  the  duty  of  receiving  it:—         

*^  "July  27,1870. 

••I  have  been  thinkini;  over  the  subject  which  just  now  gives 
you  and  me  with  thousands  of  others,  who  care  for  religion,  so 
mueh  concern. 

••Krst,  till  better  advised,  nothing  shall  make  me  say  that  a 
mere  majority  in  a  Council,  as  op[50sed  to  a  moral  unanimity,  m 
itself  creates  an  obligation  to  receive  its  dogmatic  decrees.  This 
Is  a  point  of  history  and  precedent;  and  ofcoursc  on  further  ex- 
amination I  may  find  myself  wrong  in  the  view  which  1  take  of 
history  and  precedent;  but  1  do  not,  can  not  see,  that  a  majority 
in  the  present  Council  can  of  itself  rti/e  its  own  sufficiency,  with- 
out sucli  external  testimony. 

"  But  there  are  other  means  by  which  I  can  he  brought  under 
the  obligation  of  receiving  a  doctrine  as  a  dogma.  If  I  am  clear 
that  there  is  a  primitive  and  uninterrupted  tradition,  as  of  the 
divinity  of  our  Lortl :  or  where  a  high  probability  drawn  from 
Scripture  or  Tradition  is  partially  or  probably  confirmed  by  the 
Church.  Thus  a  particular  Catholic  might  be  so  nearly  sure  that 
thejpromise  to  Peter  in  Scripture  proves  that  the  infallibility 
of  Ptter  is  a  necessary  dogma,  as  only  to  be  kept  from  holding 
it  as  such  by  the  absence  of  any  judgment  on  the  part  of  the 
Church,  so  that  the  present  unanimity  of  the  Pope  and  5C0  Bish- 
ops, even  though  not  sufficient  U)  constitute  a  formal  Synodal  act, 
would  at  once  put  him  in  the  position,  and  lay  him  under  the 
obligntion,  of  receiving  the  doctrine  as  a  dogma,  that  is,  to  re- 
ceive it  with  its  anathema. 

"  Or  again,  if  nothing  definitely  sufficient  from  Scripture  or 
Tfudition  can  be  brought  to  contradict  a  definition,  the  fact  of  a 
legitimate  Superior  having  defined  it,  may  be  an  obHgation  in 
QduieiiMe  io  receive  it  with  an  internal  assent.  For  m^yself, 
•fer  riuce  1  was  a  Catholic,  I  have  held  the  Pope's  infallibility  as 
II  imatter  of  theological  opinion ;  at  least,  1  see  nothing  in  the 
Definition  which  necessarily  contradicts  Scripture,  Tradition,  or 
Hittory ;  and  the  *  Doctor  lisclesiie,'  (as  the  Pope  is  styled  by  the 
Council  of  Florence)  bids  me  accept  it  In  this  case,  1  do  not 
reeeiv©  it  on  the  word  of  the  Council,  but  on  the  Pope's  self- 
'fl'Stvrtion. 

••And  T  confess,  the  fact  that  all  along  for  so  many  centuries 
the  Head  of  the  Church  and  Teacher  of  the  faithful  and  Vicar 
of  Christ  has  been  allowed  by  God  to  assert  virtually  his  infalli- 
bility, is  a  great  argument  in  favor  of  the  validity  of  his  claim. 

"Another  grcmnd  for  receiving  the  dogma,  still  not  upon  the 
direct  authority  of  the  Council,  or  with  acceptance  of  the  valid- 
ity of  its  act  per  #«,  is  the  consideration  that  our  Merciful  Lord 


THE  VATICAN  COUNCIIi. 


103 


would  not  care  so  little  for  His  elect  oeople,  the  multitude  of  the 
Taithful  as  to  allow  their  visible  HeaS  an<l  J-ch  a  l^r^  -^^er 
of  BishoDS  to  lead  them  into  error,  and  an  error  so  serious,  it  an 
error  TiTconsideration  leads  me  to  accept  the  doctrine  a^  a 
dogma  indirectly  indeed  from  the  Council,  but  not  so  much  from 
aXuncU,  as  lorn  the  Pope  and  a  very  large  number  o^^^ 
Bishops.  The  question  is  not  whether  they  had  a  right  to  im- 
pose or  even  w2re  right  in  imposing  the  dogma  on  the  faithful 
gut  ;hether%aving  lone  so,  I  We  not  an  obligation  to  accept 

raccording  to  the'maxim.  'Fieri  non  4f^»J^^'/*<^^r/«wnv  in 
^This  letter,  written  before  the  minority  had  melted  away,  in- 
siste  on  this  principle,  that  a  Council's  definition  would  have  a 
vfrUi^  claim  on  our  reception,  even  though  it  were  not  passed 
conciliariter,  but  in  some  indirect  way;  as,  for  instance,  to  use  a 
prrlilrenS^  expression,  in  general  committee,  the  great  objec 
of  a  clncilbeing  in  some  way  or  other  to  declare  the  judgment 
of  Sie  Church.     1  think  the  thfrd  Ecumenical  wiU  furnish  an  m- 
s tance  of  what  I  mean.     There  the  question  m  dispute  was  sc^ 
tied  and  defined,  even  before  certain  constituent  portions  of  the 
Episcopal  body  luul  made  their  appearance;  and  this,  with  a  pr^ 
test  of  08  of  the  Bishops  then  present  against  82     When  the 
remaining  43  arrived,  t^ese  did  more  than  protest  against  the 

deSonwhl^  had  been  carried;  ^h^y  ^^-^^1^  rfc'sto^ 
the  Fathers  who  carried  it,  whose  number  seems  to  have  sUyod 
alto-ether  at  124  against  111;  and  in  this  state  of  disunion  the 
Council  ended.  How,  then,  was  its  definition  valid?  By  after 
event^  wh"ch  I  suppose  must  be  considered  complements,  and 
inte-ml  P^^^^^  ofthe  Council.  The  heads  of  the  various  par- 
tLs  eXred  into  correspondence  with  each  other,  and  at  the  end 
of  twryears  their  differences  with  each  other  were  arranged. 
Thew  are  those  who  have  no  belief  in  the  authority  of  Councils 
at  alTand  fee  no  call  upon  them  to  discriminate  between  one 
C^^uncU  and  another;  but  Anglicans,  who  are  so  fierce  against 
the  Vatican,  and  so  respectfultowards  the  Ephesine  «^ouia  ^^^^^ 
aider  what  good  reason  they  have  for  swallowing  the  third  Coun- 
cil,  while  they  strain  out  the  nineteenth.  „„^.t,„,  remark 

The  Council  of  Ephesus  furnishes  us  with  another  remark 
bearing  upon  the  Vafican.     It,  was  naturul  for  men  who  were  m 
the  minority  at  Ephesus  to  think  that  the  faith  of  th^e  Church 
had  been  brought'into  the  utmost  peril  by  the  I>^fi";tion  ^^^^^ 
Council  which  they  had  unsuccessfully  opposed.    Thejji^  d^"« 
so  from  their  conviction  that  that  definition  g^ve  great  encour- 
acemcnt  to  religious   errors  in   the  opposite  extreme  to  those 
S  it  condemned;   and  in  fact.  I  think  tH^^  ^^^^^^^y/P^^^ 
ing,  the  peril  was  extreme.     The  event  proved  it  to  be  so.  when 
twenty  years  afterwards  another  Council  was  held  under  the  suc- 
cesso^  of  the  maiority  at  Ephesus  '^^^^'f  "1  *""TiP^^^^^ 
those  very  errors  whose  eventual  success  had  been  PJf^^^^Jf ^  ^ 
the  minority.     But  Providence  is  never  wanting  *«  ^;«  ^^.^^^^^^ 
St.  Leo,  the  Pope  of  the  day,  interfered  with  this  heretical  Conn 
oil,  and  the  innovating  party  was  stopped  in  its  career     its  acts 
were  cancelled  at  the  grcit  Counclf  of  Chaleedon,  the  Fourth 


^ 


11 


} 


TUB  JATKJkSt  COUNCIL. 


Bcuinenioal,  which  was  heM  iiii<ier  the  Pope's  ^idance,  tnd, 
wilhoiit  of  course  totichiiifr  the  dcitiition  of  the  Third,  which  had 
hmm  settled  once  for  all,  trimmed  the  balance  of  doctrine  by  com- 
pleting It,  and  excluded  forever  from  the  Church  those  errors 
wliioh  seemed  to  have  received  some  sanction  at  Ephesus. 
There  is  nothing  of  course  that  can  be  reversed  in  the  Vatican 
deinitions;  but,  should  the  need  arise  (which  is  not  likely),  to 
■el  riglil  a  false  interpretation,  another  Leo  will  be  given  us  for 
Urn  occasion ;  "  in  monte  Dominns  videbit." 

In  this  remark,  made  for  the  benefit  of  those  who  need  it,  as  I 
do  not  myself,  1  shelter  myself  under  the  following jpassajre  of 
llolinai  which  a  friend  has  pointed  out  to  me : — "  Though  the 
Holy  Ohost  has  always  been  present  to  the  Church,  to  Binder 
error  in  her  deinitions,  and  in  consequence  they  are  all  most  true 
and  consistent,  yet  it  is  not  therefore  to  be  denied,  that  God, 
when  any  matters  have  to  be  defined,  requires  of  the  Church  n 
oo-ojieration  and  in\'estigation  of  those  matters,  and  that,  in  pro- 
portion to  the  quality  of  the  men  who  meet  together  in  Councils, 
tn  the  investigtition  and  diligence  which  is  applied,  and  the 
greater  or  less  experience  and  knowledge  which  is  possessed  moro 
at  one  time  tlian  at  other  times,  definitions  more  or  less  perspic- 
uous are  drawn  up  and  matters  are  defined  more  exactly  and 
completely  at  one  time  tlian  at  other  times.  .  .  .  And, 
whereie  by  disputations,  persevering  reading,  meditation,  and  in- 
▼estlgation  of  matters,  there  is  wc»nt  to  be  increased  in  course  of 
time  the  knowledge  and  understanding  of  the  same,  and  the 
Fathers  of  the  later  Councils  are  assisted  by  the  investi^ition 
and  definitions  of  the  former,  hence  it  arises  that  the  definitions 
of  later  Councils  are  wont  to  be  more  luminoas,  fuller,  more  ae^ 
curate  and  exact  than  those  of  the  earlier.  Moreover,  it  belongs 
to  the  later  Councils  to  interpret  and  to  define  more  exactly  and 
fully  what  in  earlier  Councils  have  been  defined  less  clearly,  fully, 
and  exactly."    {De  Concord.  Lib.  Arbit,  etc.,  xiii.  15,  p.  59.) 

2.  The  other  main  objection  to  the  Vatican  Council  is  founded 
Qfun  its  supposed  neglect  of  history  in  the  decision  which  its 
Ileinition  embodies.  This  objection  is  touched  upon  by  Mr. 
Clladstone  in  the  beginning  of  his  Pamphlet,  where  he  speaks  of 
its  '*  ri>|iudiation  of  ancient  history,"  and  I  have  an  opportunity 
given  me  of  noticing  it  here. 

He  asserts  that,  during  the  last  forty  years,  "  more  and  more 
]»¥«  the  assertions  of  continuous  uniformity  of  doctrine"  in  the 
Ckiiiolio  Church  "receded  into  scarcely  penetrable  shadow. 
More  and  more  have  another  series  of  assertions,  of  a  living  au- 
thofitT,  ever  read^  to  open,  ado|at,  and  shape  Chrptian  doctrine 
aeeording  to  the  times,  taken  their  place."  Accordingly,  he  con- 
siders that  a  dangerous  opening  has  been  made  in  the  authorita- 
tive teaching  of  the  Church  for  the  repudiation  of  ancient  truth 
md  the  rejection  of  new.  However,  as  I  understand  him,  he 
wi|hif»ws  this  charge  from  the  controversy  he  has  initiated 
(though  not  from  his  Pamphlet)  as  far  as  it  is  aimed  at  the  pure 
theology  of  the  Church.  It  "belongs,"  he  says,  "to  the  theologi- 
mX  domain,"  and  "  is  a  matter  unfit  for  him  to  discusa,  as  it  is  a 


THK  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


105 


question  of  divinity."    It  has  been,  then,  no  duty  of  mine  to 
consider  it,  except  as  it  relates  to  matters  ecclesiastical;   but  1 
am  unwilling,  when  a  charge  has  been  made  against  our  theol- 
oev  thout'h  unsupported,  yet  unretracted,  to  leave  it  altogether 
without  r°eply;    and  that  the  more,  because    after   renouncing 
"questions  of  divinity"  at  p.   14,   nevertheless  Mr.  Gladstone 
brings  them  forward  again  at  p.  15,  speaking,  as  he  does,  of  the 
"dewlly  blows  of  1854  and  1870  at  the  old,  historic,  scientific, 
and  moderate  school"  by  the  definitions  of  the  Immaculate  Con- 
ception and  Papal  Infallibility.  .  ^  •  •       ♦u^ 
kr.  Ghidstone.  then  insists  on  the  duty  of     mamtammg  the 
truth  and  authority  of  history,  and  the  inestimable  value  of  the 
historic   spirit;"    and  so  far  of  course   I  have  the  pleasure  of 
heartily  agreeing  with  him.     As  the  Church  is  a  sacred  and  di- 
vine  creation,  so  in  like  manner  her  history,  with  its  wondertul 
evolution  of  events,  the  throng  of  ^reat  actors  who  have  a  part  m 
it  and  its  multiform  literature,  stained  though  its  annals  are  witH 
human  sin  and  error,  and  recorded  on  no  system,  and  by  un- 
inspired authors,  still  is  a  sacred  work  also ;  and  those  who  make 
li«'ht  of  it,  or  distrust  its  lessons,  incur  a  grave  responsibility. 
But  it  is  not  every  one  who  can  read  its  pages  rightly;  and  cer- 
tjiinly  1  can  not  follow  Mr.  Gladstone's  reading  of  it.     He  is  too 
well  informed  indeed,  too  large  in  his  knowledge,  too  acute  and 
comprehensive  in  his  views,  not  to  have  an  acquaintance  with 
history  far  beyond  the  run  of  even  highly  educated  men;   still, 
when  he  accuses  us  of  deficient  attention  to  history,  one  can  not 
help  asking,  whether  he  does  not,  as  a  matter  of  course^  teke  for 
granted  as  true  the  principles  for  using  it  familiar  with  Protest- 
ant divines,  and  denied  by  our  own,  and  in  consequence  whether 
his  impeachment  of  us  does  not  resolve  itself  into  the  fact  that  he 
is  Protestant  and  we  are  Catholics.     Nay,  has  it  occurred  to  him 
that  perhaps  it  is  the  fact,  that  we  have  views  on  the  relation  of 
History  to  Dogma  different  from  those  which  Protestants  maii^ 
tain?    And  is  he  so  certain  of  the  facts  of  History  in  detail,  of 
their  relevancy,  and  of  their  drift,  as  to  have  a  right,  I  do  nol 
say  to  have  an  opinion  of  his  own,  but  to  publish  to  the  world, 
on  his  own  warrant,  that  we  have  "repudiated  ancient  historjr  { 
He  publicly  charges  us,  not  merely  with  having  "  neglected     it, 
or  "garbled"  its  evidence,  or  with  having  contradicted  certain 
ancient  usages  or  doctrines  to   which  it  bears  witness,  but  he 
says  "  repudiated."     He  could  not  have  used  a  stronger  term,  sup- 
posing the  Vatican  Council  had,  by  a  formal  act,  cut  itself  off 
from  early  times,  instead  of  professing,  as  it  does  (hypocriticallv. 
If  you  will,  but  still  professing)  to  speak  "  supported  by  Holy 
Scripture  and  the  decrees  both  of  preceding  Popes  and  General 
Councils,"  and  "  faithfully  adhering  to  the  aboriginal  tradition  of 
the  Church."     Ought  any  one  but  an  oculatus  testis,  a  man  whose 
profession  was  to  aquaint  himself  with  the  details  of  history,  to 
claim  to  himself  the  right  of  bringing,  on  his  own  authority,  so 
extreme  a  charge  against  so  august  a  power,  so  inflexible  and 
rooted  in  its  traditions  through  the  long  past,  as  Mr.  Gladstone 
would  admit  the  Koman  Church  to  be  ? 


I 


m 


I 


10§ 


fHB  TATICAH  OOUNCIL. 


THB  VATICAN  OOUXCIL. 


107 


Of  oouroe  I  sliaU  be  reminded  thai,  though  Mr.  Gladstone  can 
not  be  expected  to  speak  on  so  large  a  department  of  knowledge 
with  the  confidence  decorous  in  one  who  has  made  a  personal 
study  of  it,  there  are  others  who  have  a  right  to  do  so;  and  that 
by  those  others  he  is  corroborated  and  sanctioned.  There  are 
aitlhors.  it  mm  be  said,  of  so  commanding  an  authority  for  their 
iMniliig  and  their  hoBeety,  that,  for  the  purpose  of  diseusHion  or 
of  oontPOTersy,  what  they  say  may  be  said  bjf  any  one  else  with- 
out presumption  or  risk  of  confutation.  I  will  never  say  a  word 
of  nnf  own  against  those  learned  and  distinguished  men  to  whom 
I  nnr.  No:  their  present  whereabout,  wherever  it  is,  is  to  me 
n  llioiigiit  full  of  melancholy.  It  is  a  tragical  event,  both  fur 
theiu  and  for  us,  that  they  have  left  us.  It  robs  us  of  a  great 
prmH^e :  they  have  left  none  to  take  their  place.  I  think  them 
utterly  wrong  in  what  they  have  done  and  are  doin|i; ;  and,  more- 
over, 1  agree  as  little  in  their  view  of  history  as  m  their  acts. 
Sxtenslve  as  may  be  their  historical  knowledge,  I  have  no 
reasfin  to  think  that  they,  more  than  Mr.  Gladstone,  would  accept 
the  position  which  History  holds  among  the  Loci  Theuhgici,  as 
Catiolie  theologians  determine  it;  and  I  am  denying  not  their 
report  of  facts,  but  their  use  of  the  facts  thev  report,  und  that,  be- 
cause  of  that  special  stand-point  from  which  they  view  the  rela- 
tions existing  between  the  records  of  History  and  the  enuncia- 
tions of  Popes  and  Councils.  They  seem  to  me  to  expect  from 
History  more  than  History  can  furnish,  and  to  have  too  little  con- 
fidence in  the  Divine  Promise  and  Providence  as  guiding  and  de- 
termining those  enunciations. 

Why  should  Ecclesiastical  History,  any  more  than  the  text  of 
Scripture,  contain  in  it  "the  whole  counsel  of  God?"  Why 
should  private  judgment  be  unlawful  in  interpreting  Scripture 
against  the  voice  ofauthority,  and  yet  be  lawful  in  the  interpre- 
tation of  History?  There  are  those  who  make  short  work  of 
2uestions  such  as  these  bjr  denying  authoritative  interpretation 
ttOgether;  that  is  their  private  concern,  and  no  one  has  a  right 
to  inquire  into  their  reason  for  so  doing;  but  the  case  would  be 
iiibfftnt  were  such  a  man  to  come  forward  publicly,  and  to  ar- 
fttign  others,  without  first  confuting  their  theological* j;ra;ain&ii/a, 
for  repudiating  history,  or  for  repudiating  the  Bible. 

For  myself,  I  would  simply  confess  that  no  doctrine  of  the 
Church  can  be  rigorouslv  proved  by  historical  evidence;  but  at 
the  same  time  that  no  <loctrino  can  be  simply  disproved  by  it 
Historical  evidence  reaches  a  certain  way,  more  or  less,  toward  a 
proof  of  the  Catholic  doctrines;  often  nearly  the  whole  way; 
sometimes  it  goes  only  so  far  as  to  point  in  their  direction ;  some- 
times there  is  only  an  absence  of  evidence  for  a  conclusion  con- 
trary  to  them;  nay,  sometimes  there  is  an  apparent  leaning  of  the 
Of ilence  to  a  contrary  conclusion,  which  has  to  be  explained ; — 
In  111  Mses  there  is  a  margin  left  for  the  exercise  of  faith  in  the 
word  of  the  Church.  He  who  belives  the  dogmas  of  the  Church 
only  because  he  has  reasoned  them  out  of  History,  is  scarcely  a 
CJniiolic.  It  is  the  Church's  use  of  History  in  which  the  Catholic 
believes ;  and  she  uses  other  informants  also,  Scripture,  Tradition, 


the  ecclesiastical  sense,  or  fpoyTjfia,  and  a  subtle  ratiocinative 
power  which  in  its  origin  is  a  divine  gift.  There  is  nothing  of 
bonda«re  or  "renunciation  of  mental  freedom"  in  this  view,  any 
more  than  in .  the  converts  of  the  Apostles  believing  what  the 
Apostles  might  preach  to  them  or  teach  them  out  of  Scripture. 

What  has  been  said  of  History  in  relation  to  the  formal  Defini- 
tions of  the  Church,  applies  also  to  the  exercises  of  Ratiocination. 
Our  logical  powers,  too,  being  a  gift  from  God,  may  claim  to  have 
their  informations  respected;  and  Protestants  sometimes  accuse 
our  theologians,  for  instance,  the  medieval  schoolmen,  of  having 
used  them  in  divine  matters  a  little  too  freely.  But  it  has  ever 
been  our  teaching  and  our  protest  that,  as  there  are  doctrines 
which  lie  beyond  the  direct  evidence  of  history,  so  there  are  doc- 
trines which  transcend  the  discoveries  of  reason:  and,  after  all, 
whether  they  are  more  or  less  recommended  to  us  by  the  one  in- 
formant or  the  other,  in  all  oases  the  immediate  motive  in  the 
mind  of  a  Catholic  for  his  reception  of  them  is,  not  that  they  are 
proved  to  him  by  Reason  or  by  History,  but  because  Revelation 
Lis  declared  them  by  means  of  that  high  ecclesiastical  Magiste- 
rium,  which  is  their  legitimate  exponent. 

What  has  been  said  also  applies  to  those  other  truths,  with 
which  Ratiocination  has  more  to  do  than  History,  which  are 
sometimes  called  developments  of  Christian  doctrine,  truths 
which  are  not  upon  the  surface  of  the  Apostolic  depositum — 
that  is,  the  legacy  of  Revelation,— but  which  from  time  to  time 
are  brought  into  form  by  Theologians,  and  sometimes  have  been 

Proposed  to  the  faithful  by  the  Church,  as  direct  objects  of  faith. 
lo  Catholic  would  hold  that  they  ought  to  be  logically  deduced  in 
their  fullness  and  exactness  from  the  belief  of  the  first  centuries, 
but  only  this,— that,  on  the  assumption  of  the  Infallibility  of  the 
Church  (which  will  overcome  every  objection  except  a  contra- 
diction in  thought),  there  is  nothing  greatly  to  try  -the  reason  in 
such  diflBculties  as  occur  in  reconciling  those  evolved  doctrines 
with  the  teaching  of  the  ancient  Fathers;  such  development 
being  evidently  the  new  form,  explanation,  transformation,  or 
carrying  out  of  what  in  substance  was  held  from  the  first,  what 
the  Apostles  said,  but  have  not  recorded  in  writing,  or  would 
necessarily  have  said  under  our  circumstances,  or  if  they  had 
been  asked,  or  in  view  of  certain  uprisings  of  error,  and  in  that 
sense  really  portions  of  the  legacy  of  truth,  of  which  the  Church, 
in  all  her  members,  but  especially  in  her, hierarchy,  is  the  di- 
vinely appointed  trustee. 

Such  an  evolution  of  doctrine  has  been,  as  I  would  maintain,  a 
law  of  the  Church's  teaching  from  the  earliest  times,  and  in  nothing 
is  her  title  of  "semper  eadem"  more  remarkably  illustrated  than 
in  the  correspondence  of  her  ancient  and  modern  exhibition  of 
it.  As  to  the  ecclesiastical  Acts  of  1854  and  1870,  I  think  with 
Mr.  Gladstone  that  the  principle  of  doctrinal  development,  and 
that  of  authority,  have  never  m  the  proceedings  of  the  Church 
been  so  freely  and  largely  used  as  in  the  Definitions  then  promul- 
gated to  the  faithful ;  but  I  deny  that  at  either  time  the  testimony 
of  history  was  repudiated  or  perverted.     The  utmost  that  can  bo 


R' 


i 


itnl 


TBB  JATmAH  OOUKOII.. 


lurljiftM  by  an  op|>oneiit  against  the  theological  decisions  of  tlios« 
fmm  is,  thiit  antecedently  to  the  event,  it  might  appear  that  then) 
wife  no  snfficient  historical  grounds  in  behalf  of  either  of  them— 
I  do  not  mean  for  a  i>er8onal  belief  in  either,  butr-for  the  purpose 
©f  converting  a  doctrine  long  existing  in  the  Church  into  a  dogma^ 
and  making  it  a  portion  of  the  Catholic  Creed.  This  adverse  an- 
ticipation was  proved  to  be  a  mistake  by  the  fact  of  the  definition 
Minciiiade. 

I.  Here  I  will  iay  just  a  few  words  on  the  case  of  Pope  Hono- 
rius,  whoee  condemnation  by  anathema  in  the  6th  Ecumenical 
CSomncil,  is  certainly  a  strong  primd  facie  argument  against  the 
Pope's  doctrinal  infyiibllity.  His  ease  is  this :— Sergius,  Patri- 
arch _of  Constantinople,  favored,  or  rather  did  not  condemn,  a 
doctrine  concerning  our  liord's  Person  which  afterward  the  Sixth 
Conncil  pronounced  to  be  heresv.  He  consulted  Pope  Honorius 
upon  the  subject,  who  in  two  formal  letters  declared  his  entire 
concurrence  with  Sergins's  oi)inion.  Honorius  died  in  peace,  bat, 
■ore  than  forty  years  after  him,  the  6th  Ecumenical  Council  waa 
held,  which  condemned  him  as  a  heretic  on  the  score  of  those  two 
letters.  The  simple  question  is,  whether  the  heretical  documents 
priMeeded  from  him  m  an  infhllible  authority  or  as  a  private 
.IiitliO|i. 

ll<iw  I  observe  that  whereas  the  Yatioan  Council  has  deter- 
miadl  tiiat  the  Pope  is  infallible  only  when  he  speaks  ex  caihe- 
ilr4,  and  that,  in  order  to  speak  ex  caihedrd,  he  must  at  least 
e|Mak  "  as  exercising  the  office  of  Pastor  and  Doctor  of  all  Chris- 
tians, defining,  by  virtue  of  his  Apostolical  authority,  a  doctrine 
whether  of  faith  or  of  morals  for  the  acceptance  of  the  universal 
Cliurch"  (though  Mr.  Gladstone  strangely  says,  p.  34,  "There  is 
110  established  or  accepted  definition  of  the  phrase  ex  caihedrd"), 
from  this  Pontifical  and  dogmatic  explanation  of  the  phrase  it  fol- 
lows, that,  whatever  Honorius  said  in  answer  to  Sergius,  and  what- 
ever he  held,  his  words  were  not  ex  caihedrd,  and  therefore  did 
not  proceed  from  his  infallibility. 

I  say  so  first,  because  he  could  not  fulfill  the  above  conditions 
of  an  ex  caihedrd  utterance,  if  he  did  not  actually  mean  to  fulfill 
them.  The  question  is  unlike  the  Question  about  the  Sacra- 
ments; external  and  positive  acts,  whether  material  actions  or 
formal  words,  speak  for  themselves.  Teaching,  on  the  other  hand, 
lias  ^no  sacnimental  visible  signs ;  it  is  mainly  a  question  of  in- 
tention. Who  would  sav  that  the  architriclinus  at  the  wedding 
ftttsi  who  said,  "Thou  hast  kept  the  good  wine  until  now,"  was 
teaching  the  Christian  world,  though  the  words  have  a  great  cth- 
ioal  and  evangelical  sense?  What  is  the  worth  of  a  signature, 
if  a  nan  does  not  consider  he  is  signing  ?  The  Pope  can  not 
address  his  people,  East  and  WesC  North  and  South,  without 
liisning  it,  as  if  his  very  voice,  the  sounds  from  his  lips,  could 
lllemlly  be  heard  from  pole  to  pole ;  nor  can  he  exert  his  "Apos- 
tolical authority"  without  knowing  he  is  doing  so;  nor  can  he 
draw  up  a  form  of  words  and  use  care  and  make  an  effort  in  do- 
ing so  aeiwratelijr,  without  intention  to  do  so ;  and,  therefore,  no 
— '^-*-  wf  Hononus  proceeded  from  his  prerogative  of  infallible 


THE  VATICAN  C017NCIL. 


109 


teaching  which  were  not  accompanied  with  the  intention  of  ex- 
ercising that  prerogative ;  and  who  wiU  dream  of  saying,  be  he 
Anglican  Protestant,  unbeliever,  or  on  the  other  hand  Catholic, 
that  Honorius  in  the  7th  century  did  actually  intend  to  exert  that 
infallible  teaching  voice  which  has  been  dogmatically  recognized 

in  the  nineteenth  ?  ^  , .         ...        i       i. 

What  resemblance  do  these  letters  of  his,  written  almost  as 
private  instructions,  bear  to  the  "Pius  Episcopus,  Servus  Ser- 
Torum  Dei,  Sacro  approbante  Concilio,  ad  perpetnam  ret  memor- 
iam"  with  the  "  Si  quis  huic  nostrae  definitioni  contradicere  (quod 
Deus  avertat),  praesumpsorit  anathema  sit"  of  the  Pastor  jEier- 
«ii«t  What  to  the  "  Venerabilibus  fratribus»  Patriarchis,  prim- 
atibus,  Archiepiscopis,  et  Episcopis  universis,"  etc.,  and  with  the 
date  and  signature,  "  Datum  Roma  apud  Sanctum  Petrum,  Die 
8  Dec.  anno  1864,  etc.    Pius  P.  P.  IX."  of  the  Quantd  cvrd  f 

Secondly,  it  is  no  part  of  our  doctrine,  as  1  shall  say  m  my 
next  section,  that  the  discussions  previous  to  a  Council  s  defini- 
tion, or  to  an  ex  caihedrd  utterance  of  a  Pope,  are  infallible;  and 
these  letters  of  Honorius  on  their  very  face  are  nothing  more 
than  portions  of  a  discussion  with  a  view  to  some  final  decision. 

For  these  two  reasons  the  condemnation  of  Honorius  by  tjj? 
Council  in  no  sense  compromises  the  doctrine  of  Papal  Infalli- 
bility. At  the  utmost,  it  only  decides  that  Honorius  m  his  own 
person  was  a  heretic,  which  is  inconsistent  with  no  Catholic  doc- 
trine; but  we  may  rather  hope  and  believe  that  the  anathema 
fell,  not  upon  him,  but  upon  his  letters  in  their  objective  sense, 
he  not  intending  personally  what  his  letters  legitimately  ex- 
pressed. . 

4.  I  have  one  more  remark  to  make  upon  the  argumentative 
method  by  which  the  Vatican  Council  was  carried  on  to  its  defi- 
nition. The  Pastor  JStemus  refers  to  various  witnesses  as  con- 
tributing their  evidence  towards  the  determination  of  the  con- 
tents of  the  deposiium,  such  as  Tradition,  the  Fathers  and  Coiin- 
cils,  History,  and  especially  Scripture.  For  instance,  the  Bull 
speaks  of  the  Gospel  ("  juxta  Evangelii  testimonia,^  c.  1)  and  ot 
Scripture  ("manifesta  S.  S.  Scripturarum  doctrina,    c.  1 :  '  aper- 


tis  8.  S.  Literarum  testimoniis,''^  c.  3.     "S.  S.  Scripturis  consen- 


♦Feed  My  sheep,"  etc.,  John  xxi.  15-17.  Now  I  wish  all  ob- 
jectors to  our  method  of  reasoning  from  Scripture  would  view  it 
in  the  light  of  the  following  passage  in  the  great  philosophical 
work  of  Butler,  Bishop  of  Durham.  ,    ,        ,    ,        ,  ^ 

He  writes  as  follows— "As  it  is  owned  the  whole  scheme  ot 
Scripture  is  not  yet  understood,  so,  if  it  ever  comes  to  be  under- 
stood, before  the  •  restitution  of  all  things,'  and  without  miracu- 
lous interpositions,  it  must  He  in  the  same  way  as  natural  knowl- 
edge is  come  at,  by  the  continuance  and  progress  of  learning  and 
of  liberty,  and  by  particular  persons  attending  to,  comparing, 
and  pursuing  intimations  scattered  up  and  down  it,  which  are 
overlooked,  and  disregarded    by  the  generality  of  the  world. 


lilt 
"1! 


i-**  aiiLa.MMiu.JBi«^JiMi 


110 


TMIS    Y.ATlli<AA    iMMSwlXlTIOSft 


For  tliis  is  tlie  waj  in  which  til  improTements  are  made  by 
thoughtful  men  tracing  on  obncure  hints,  as  it  were,  droi)pod  us 
W  Bfttnre  accidentally,  or  which  seem  to  come  into  our  minds  by 
chanca  Nor  is  it  <il  all  incredible  that  a  book,  which  has  been 
■o  long  in  the  possession  of  mankind,  should  contain  many 
Imtha  as  yet  undiscovered.  For  all  the  same  phenomena,  and 
llio  laiiie  faculties  of  investigation,  from  which  such  great  din* 
coTeries  in  natural  knowledge  have  been  ma4e  in  the  present 
and  last  age,  were  equally  in  the  possession  of  mankind  several 
thousand  years  before.  And  possibly  it  might  be  intended  that 
«Tiiiiii  aa  they  come  to  pass,  should  open  and  ascertain  the 
ffliMming  of  several  parts  of  Scripture,"  ii.  3,  vide  also  ii.  4,  fin. 
What  has  the  long  history  of  tne  contest  for  and  against  the 
Fope'i  infallibility  been,  but  a  growing  insight  through  centuries 
into  the  meaning  of  those  three  texts,  to  which  I  just  now  re- 
ferred, ending  at  length  by  the  Church's  definitive  recognition 
of  the  doctrine  tha.  g™duully  manifested  to  her? 


J  9.  The  Vatican  Definitiojc. 

Now  I  am  to  speak  of  the  Vatican  definition,  by  which  the 
iMtrine  of  the  Pope's  infallibility  has  become  de  j^de,  that  is, 
m  tenth  necessary  to  be  believed,  as  being  included  in  the  origi- 
Bftl  iivine  revelation,  for  those  terms,  revelation,  depositum, 
4mmK  and  defdt,  are  correlatives;  and  I  begin  with  a  remark 
wFich  suggests  the  dria  of  all  1  have  to  sav  about  it  It  is  this: 
Chat  so  difficult  a  virtue  is  faith,  even  with  the  snecial  grace  of 
Hod,  in  proportion  as  the  reason  is  exercised,  so  aifficult  is  it  to 
ftasent  inwardly  to  propositions,  verified  to  us  neither  by  reason 
nor  experience,  but  depending  for  their  reception  on  the  word 
of  the  Church  as  God's  oracle,  that  she  has  ever  shown  the  ut- 
most care  to  contract,  aa  far  as  possible,  the  range  of  truths  3tnd 
the  sense  of  propositions,  of  which  she  demands  this  absolute 
reception.  "  The  Church,"  mjn  Pallavicini,  "  as  far  as  may  be, 
has  ever  abstained  from  imposing  upon  the  minds  of  men  that 
Qommandment,  the  most  arduous  of  the  Christian  Law — viz.,  to 
believe  obscure  matters  without  doubting."  *  To  co-<iperate  in 
this  charitable  duty  has  been  one  special  work  of  her  theologians, 
and  rules  are  laid  down  by  herselr,  by  tradition,  and  by  custom, 
to  assist  them  in  the  tJisk.  She  only  speaks  when  it  is  necessary 
to  speak;  but  hardly  has  she  spoken  out  magisterially  some  great 
general  principle,  when  she  sets  her  theologians  to  work  to  ex- 
phiin  her  meauincr  in  the  concrete,  by  strict  interpretation  of  its 
wording,  by  the  illustration  of  its  circumstances,  and  by  the  reo* 
ognition  of  exceptions,  in  order  to  make  it  as  tolerable  as  possi- 
U«.  and  the  least  of  a  toniptation,  to  8elf-willcd,  independe!!t,  or 
wrongly  educated  minds,  A  few  years  ago  it  was  the  fashion 
ong  us  to  call  writers,  who  conformed  to  this  rule  of  the 


*  Quoted  by  Father  Ryder,  (to  whorii  I  am  indebted    for  other 
of  my  references,)  in  his  ''Idealism  in  Theology,"  p.  25. 


THE    VATICAN   DKFINITIOK. 


Ill 


Church,  by  the  name  of  "  Minimizers ; "  that  day  of  tvrannons 
ipsedixits,  I  trust,  is  over:  Bishop  Fessler,  a  man  of  high  author- 
ity, for  he  was  Secrettiry  General  of  the  Vatican  Council,  and 
of  higher  authority  still  m  his  work,  for  it  has  the  approbation 
of  the  Sovereign  Pontiff,  clearly  proves  to  us  that  a  moderation 
of  doctrine,  dictated  by  charitjr,  is  not  inconsistent  with  sound- 
ness in  the  faith.  Such  a  sanction,  I  suppose,  will  be  considered 
sufficient  for  the  character  of  the  remarks  which  I  am  about  to 
make  upon  definitions  in  general,  and  upon  the  Vatican  in  par- 
ticular. 

The  Vatican  definition,  which  comes  to  us  in  the  shape  of  the 
Pope's  Encyclical  Bull  called  the  Pastor  jEiernus,  declares  that 
"the  Pope  has  that  same  hifallibility  which  the  Church  has:  "*  to 
determine  therefore  what  is  meant  by  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope 
we  must  turn  first  to  consider  the  infallibility  of  the  Church. 
And  again,  to  determine  the  character  of  the  Church's  infalli- 
bility, we  must  consider  what  is  the  characteristic  of  Christianity, 
considered  as  a  revelation  of  God's  will. 

Our  Divine  Master  might  have  communicated  to  us  heavenly 
truths  without  telling  us  that  they  came  from  Him,  as  it  is  com- 
monly thought  He  has  done  in  the  case  of  heathen  nations ;  but 
He  willed  the  Gospel  to  be  a  revelation  acknowledged  and  authen- 
ticated, to  be  public,  fixed,  and  permanent;  and,  accordingly,  as 
Catholics  hold.  He  framed  a  society  of  men  to  be  its  home,  its  in- 
strument, and  its  guarantee.  The  rulers  of  that  Association  are 
the  legal  trustees,  so  to  say,  of  the  sacred  truths  which  he  spoke 
to  the  Apostles  by  word  or  mouth.  As  he  was  leaving  them,  He 
gave  them  their  great  commission,  and  bade  them  "  teach  "  their 
converts  all  over  the  earth,  "to  observe  all  things  whatever  He 
had  commanded  them  : "  and  then  he  added,  "Lo,  I  am  with  you 
alwjiy«,  even  to  the  end  of  the  world." 

Here,  first,  He  told  them  to  "  teach"  His  revealed  Truth;  next, 
••  to  the  consummation  of  all  things : "  thirdly,  for  their  encour- 
agement. He  said  that  He  would  be  with  them  "  all  days,"  all 
along  on  every  emergency  or  occasion,  until  that  consummation. 
They  had  a  duty  put  upon  them  of  teaching  their  Master's  words, 
a  duty  which  they  could  not  fulfill  in  the  perfection  which  fidelity 
required,  without  His  help ;  therefore  came  His  promise  to  be 
with  them  in  their  performance  of  it.  Nor  did  that  promise  of 
supernatural  help  end  with  the  Apostles  personally,  for  He  adds, 
"  to  the  consummation  of  the  world,"  implying  that  the  Apostles 
would  have  successors,  and  engaging  that  He  would  be  with  those 
successors,  as  He  had  been  with  them. 

The  same  safeguard  of  the  Revelation— viz.,  an  authoritative, 
permanent  tradition  of  teaching  is  insisted  on  bv  an  informant 
of  equal  authority  with  St.  Matthew,  but  altogether  independent 
of  him,  I  mean  St.  Paul.  He  calls  the  Church  "  the  pillar  and 
ground  of  the  Truth ;  "  and  he  bids  his  convert  Timothy,  when 

♦Romanura  Poiitificem  eft  infallibilitate  ijoUcre,  quA  divinusRe- 
deniptf>r  Ecclesiani  suam  in  definienda  doctrinft  de  nde  vel  moribus 
iustructaui  esse  voluit. 


1)1 


W 


i 


112 


TIIK  VATICAN    DKFISITIOX. 


Im  bid  become  a  foler  in  that  Church,  to  "take  heed  unto  his 
ioctrine,"  to  "  keep  the  depoeit"  of  the  faith,  and  to  "  commit 
the  thin|5ii  which  he  had  heaid  from  himself  "  lo  faithful  men 
who  should  be  fit  to  teach  others." 

This  is  how  CSatholics  understand  the  Scripture  record,  nor 
does  it  appear  how  it  can  otherwise  be  understood;  but,  when  we 
ha¥e  got  as  far  as  this,  and  look  back,  we  find  that  we  have  by 
implication  made  profession  of  a  further  doctrine.  For,  if  the 
Church,  initiated  by  the  Apostles  and  continued  in  their  succes- 
sors, has  been  set  up  for  the  direct  object  of  protecting,  preserv- 
inii  and  declaring  the  Revelation,  and  that  by  means  of  the 
QiMvdianship  and  Providence  of  its  Divine  Autlior,  we  are  led 
on  to  perceive  that,  in  asserting  this,  we  are  in  other  words  as- 
Mrting.  that,  so  far  as  the  revealed  messa^  is  concerned,  the 
Cihiiich  is  infallible ;  for  what  is  meant  bj  infallibility  m  teach- 
ing Irnt  that  the  teacher  in  his  teaching  is  secured  from  error  ? 
wm  how  can  fallible  man  be  thus  secured  except  by  a  supernal 
ural  infallible  guidance?  And  what  can  have  been  the  object  of 
the  words.  *'I  am.  with  you  all  along  to  the  end,"  but  to  give 
thereby  an  answer  by  anticiption  to  the  spontaneous  silent 
aiinp  of  the  feeble  company  of  fiRhermen  and  laborers,  to  whom 
th«f  were  addressed,  on  their  finding  themselves  laden  with  su- 
ffflrlnman  duties  and  responsibilities?  ^  „., .,.       ^   .^ 

Such,  then,  being,  in  its  simple  outline,  the  infallibility  of  the 
Church,  such  too  will  be  the  Pope's  infallibility,  as  the  Vatican 
Fathers  have  defined  it.  And  if  we  find  that  by  means  of  this 
CMtliae  we  are  able  to  fill  out  in  all  imnortant  respects  the  idea 
of  a  Council's  inHUlibility,  we  shall  thereby  be  ascertaining  in  de- 
tail what  has  been  defined  in  1870  about  the  infallibility  of  the 
Pope.     With  an  attempt  to  do  this  I  shall  conclude. 

1.  The  Church  has  the  office  of  teaching,  and  the  matter  of 
that  teaching  is  the  body  of  doctrine,  which  the  Apostles  left  be- 
hind them  as  her  perpetual  possession.  If  a  question  arises  as  to 
what  the  Apostolic  doctrine  is  on  a  particular  point,  she  has  in- 
fallibili^  promised  to  her  to  eioable  her  to  answer  correcdv. 
And,  as  by  the  teaching  of  the  Church  is  understood,  not  the  teach- 
ing of  this  or  that  Bishop,  but  tlieir  united  voice,  and  a  Council 
is  the  form  the  Church  must  take,  in  order  that  all  men  may  rec- 
HfpiM  that  in  fact  she  is  teaching  on  any  point  in  dispute  so  in 
like  manner  the  Pope  must  come  before  us  in  some  special  form 
or  posture,  if  he  is  to  be  understood  to  be  exercising  his  teaching 
office,  and  that  form  is  called  ex  cathedrd.  This  term  is  most 
appropriate,  as  being  on  one  occasion  used  by  our  Lord  Himself. 
When  the  Jewish  doctors  taught,  they  nlaced  themselves  in  Mo- 
ses* seat,  and  spoke  ex  caihedrd;  and  then,  as  He  tells  us,  thp;r 
were  to  be  obeyed  by  their  people,  and  that,  whatever  were  their 
nrifate  lives  or  characters.  "The  Scribes  and  Pharisees,"  He 
says,  "are  seated  on  the  chair  of  Moses:  all  thin|^  therefore  what- 
soever they  shall  say  to  you.  observe  and  do;  Ijut  according  to 
their  works  do  you  not,  for  they  say  and  do  not." 

2.  The  forms  by  which  a  General  Council  is  identified  as  repre- 
senting the  Church   herself,  are  too  clear  to  need  drawing  out; 


THE  VATICAN   DEFINITIOlf. 


113 


I 


but  what  is  to  be  that  moral  cathedra,  or  teaching  chair,  in  which 
the  Pope  sits,  when  he  is  to  be  recognized  as  in  the  exercise  of 
his  infallible  teaching?  The  new  definition  answers  this  ques- 
tion. He  speaks  ex  cathedrd,  or  infallibly,  when  he  speaks,  first, 
as  the  Universal  Teacher;  secondly,  in  the  name  and  with  the 
authority  of  the  Apostles;  thirdly,  on  a  point  of  faith  and  morals; 
fourthly,  with  the  purpose  of  binding  every  member  of  the  Church 
to  accept  and  believe  his  decision.  ^    .   -  „. 

3.  These  conditions  of  course  contract  the  range  of  his  mfallF 
bility  most  materially.  Hence  Billuart  speaking  of  the  Pope 
gays,  "  Neither  in  conversation,  nor  in  discussion,  nor  in  mteiv 
preting  Scripture  or  the  Fathers,  nor  in  consulting,  nor  in  giving 
his  reasons  lor  the  point  which  he  has  defined,  nor  in  answering 
letters,  nor  in  private  deliberations,  supposing  he  is  setting  forth 
his  own  opinion,  is  the  Pope  infallil)le,^  t.  ii.  p.  110*  And  for 
this  simple  reason,  because,  on  these  various  occasions  of  speak- 
ing his  mind,  he  is  not  in  the  chair  of  the  universal  doctor. 

4.  Nor  is  this  all:  the  greater  prt  of  Billuart's  negatives  refer 
to  the  Pope's  utterances  when  he  is  out  of  the  Cathedra  Petri,  but 
even;  when  he  is  in  it,  his  words  do  not  necessarily  proceed  from  his 
infallibility.  He  has  no  wider  prerogative  than  a  Council,  and 
of  a  Council  Pcrrone  says,  "  Councils  are  not  infallible  m  the 
reasons  by  which  they  are  led,  or  on  which  they  rely,  in  making 
their  definition,  nor  in  matters  which  relate  to  persons,  nor  to 
physical  matters  which  have  no  necessary  connection  with 
dogma."— Proj^.  Theol  t.  ii.  p.  492.  Thus,  if  a  Council  has  con- 
demned a  work  of  Origen  or  Theodoret,  it  did  not  m  so  condemn- 
ing go  beyond  the  work  itself;  it  did  not  touch  the  persons  of 
either.  Since  this  holds  of  a  Council,  it  also  holds  in  the  case 
of  the  Pope ;  therefore,  supposing  a  Pope  has  quoted  the  so-called 
works  of  the  Areopagite  as  if  really  genuine,  there  is  no  c^  on 
us  to  believe  him;  nor  again,  when  he  condepned  Galileo's  Coper- 
nicanism,  unless  the  earth's  immobility  has  a  "  necessary  con^ 
nection  with  some  dogmatic  truth,"  which  the  present  bearing  of 
the  Holy  See  towards  that  philosophy  virtually  denies. 

5.  Nor  is  a  Council  infallible,  even  in  the  prefaces  and  intro- 
ductions to  its  definitions.  There  are  theologians  of  name,  aa 
Tournely  and  Amort,t  who  contend  that  even  those  most  instruct- 
ive capitala  passed  in  the  Tridcntine  Council,  from  which  the 
Canons  with  anathemas  are  drawn  up,  are  not  portions  of  the 
Church's  infallible  teaching;  and  the  parallel  introductions  pre- 
fixed to  the  Vatican  anathemas  have  an  authority  not  greate*  nor 
less  than  that  of  those  capitula. 

6.  Such  passages,  however,  as  these  are  too  closely  connectol 
with  the  definitions  themselves,  not  to  be  what  is  sometimes  called, 
by  a  catachresis,  "proximum  fidei";  still,  on  the  other  hand,  it 

♦And  so  Fessler:  "The  Pope  is  not  infallible  as  a  man,  or  a 
theologian,  or  a  priest,  or  a  bishop,  or  a  temporal  prince,  or  a  judge, 
or  a  legislator,  or  in  his  poUtical  views,  or  even  in  his  government 
of  the  Church." — Introd.  ,,      .     .,      -rr     — 

tnu  Amort.   Deni.  Or.,  pp.  205-6.    This  appUes  to  the  Unam 
Sanctam.     Vid.  Fessler. 
10 


If 


i 


i 


ii 


I 

I 


114 


VATICAN   DEFINITION. 


THE  VATICAN   DEFINITION. 


115 


is  tree  also  that,  in  those  circumstances  and  surroundings  of  for* 
mal  deinitions,  which  I  have  been  speaking  of,  whether  of  » 
Council  or  a  Pope,  there  may  be  not  onlv  no  exercise  of  an  infal- 
lible foice,  but  actual  error.  Thus,  in  the  Third  Council,  a  pas- 
•aao  of  an  heretical  author  was  quoted  in  defense  of  the  doctrine 
deined.  under  the  »>elief  he  wa«  Fope  Julius,  and  narratives  not 
trustworthy,  are  introduced  into  the  Seventh.  ^ 

This  remark  and  several  before  it  wiU  become  intelligible  if 
we  consider  that  neither  Pope  nor  Council  are  on  a  level  with  the 
Apottlea*  To  the  Apostles  the  whole  revelation  was  given,  by 
the  &mmh  it  is  transmitted;  no  simply  new  truth  has  been  j^iven 
to  us  sinoe  St  John's  death;  the  one  office  of  the  Church  is  to 
guard  "  that  noble  deposit  "of  truth,  as  St.  Paul  speaks  to  Timothy. 
which  the  Apostles  beuueathed  to  her,  in  its  fullness  and  integ- 
rity. Hence  the  infallibility  of  the  Apostles  was  of  a  far  more 
poeitive  and  wide  character  than  that  needed  by  and  granted  to 
the  Church  We  call  it,  in  the  case  of  the  Apostles,  inspiration; 
in  the  case  of  the  Church,  assutentim.  .    ,.     „  .       . .  , 

Of  course  there  is  a  sense  of  the  word  "  inspiration  m  which 
it  is  common  to  all  members  of  the  Church,  and  therefore  espec- 
ially to  its  Bishops,  and  still  more  directly  to  its  rulers,  when 
■olenmly  called  together  in  Council  after  much  ijraver  throughout 
Christendom,  and  in  a  frame  of  mind  especially  serious  and 
earnest  by  reason  of  the  work  they  have  in  hand.  Th6  Paraclete 
certainly  is  ever  with  them,  and  more  effectively  in  a  Council*  as 
being  "  in  Spiritu  Simcto  congregata; "  but  I  speak  of  the  soecial 
and  promised  aid  necessary  for  their  fidelity  to  apostohc  teaching; 
ami,  in  order  to  secure  this  fidelity,  no  inward  gift  of  infallibility 
is  aeeded,  such  as  the  AposUes  had.  no  direct  suggestion  of  divme 
truth,  but  simply  an  external  guardianship,  keeping  them  off 
from  error  (as  a  man's  Guardian  Angel,  witliout  enaWinir  him  to 
walk,  might,  on  a  night  journey,  keep  him  from  pitfalls  m  hia 
way),  a  guardianship  saving  them,  as  far  as  their  ultimate  decis- 
ions are  concerned,  from  the  effects  of  their  inherent  inhrmities, 
from  any  chance  of  extravagance,  of  confusion  of  thought,  of  col- 
Jiiicm  with  former  decisions,  or  with  Scripture,  which  in  seasons 
ofexcitement  might  reasonably  be  feared.  ,       .*.    r 

'•  Never,"  says  Perrone,  "  have  Catholics  taught  that  the  gift  of 
iaiiiliibiHty  is  given  by  God  to  the  Church  after  the  manner  of  in- 
spinAm."— i  2,  p.  253.  Again:  " [Human]  media  of  amving 
at  the  truth  are  excluded  neither  by  a  Council  a  nor  by  a  rope  s 
infallibility,  for  God  has  promised  it,  not  by  wajjr  of  an  mfused 
or  habitual  "gift,  but  by  the  way  of  mauUniia.  — tfrtrf.  p.  541. 

But  since  the  process  of  defining  truth  is  human,  it  is  open  to 
Iheilhance  of  error:  what  Providence  has  guaranteed  is  only  this, 
that  there  should  be  no  error  in  the  final  step,  in  the  resulting 

definition  or  dogma.  ,    „  .,^  .  ..     t>        •    • 

7.  Accordingly,  all  that  a  Council,  and  all  that  the  Pope,  is  in- 
fallible in,  is  the  direct  answer  to  the  special  question  which  he 
happens  to  be  considering ;  his  prerogative  does  not  extend  be- 
yond a  power,  when  in  his  Cathedra,  of  giving  that  very  answer 
truly.    "Nothing,"  says  Porrone,  "but  the  objecU  of  dogmatic 


definitions  of  Councils  are  immutable,  for  in  these  are  Councils 
infallible,  not  in  their  reasons,"  etc. — ibid. 

8.  This  rule  is  so  strictly  to  be  observed  that,  though  dogmatic 
statements  are  found  from  time  to  time  in  a  Pope's  Apostolic  Let- 
ters, etc.,  yet  they  are  not  accounted  to  be  exercises  of  his  infalli- 
bility if  they  are  said  only  obiter— hy  the  way,  and  without  direct 
intention  to  define.  A  striking  instance  of  this  sine  qua  won  con- 
dition is  afforded  by  Nicholas  I.,  who,  in  a  letter  to  the  Bulgarians, 
spoke  as  if  baptism  were  valid,  when  administered  simply  in  our 
Lord's  Name,  without  distinct  mention  of  the  Three  Persons ;  but 
he  is  not  teaching  and  speaking  ex  cathedrd^  because  no  question 
on  this  matter  was  in  any  sense  the  occasion  of  his  writing.  The 
question  asked  of  him  was  concerning  the  minister  of  baptism — 
viz.,  whether  a  Jew  or  Pagjin  could  validly  baptize;  in  answering 
in  the  affirmative,  he  added  obiter,  as  a  private  doctor,  says  Bellar- 
mine,  "that  the  baptism  was  valid,  whether  administered  in  the 
name  of  the  Three  Persons  or  in  the  name  of  Christ  only."  •  {de 
Mom.  Pont,  iv.  12.)  _.    , " 

9.  Another  limitation  is  given  in  Pope  Pius  s  own  conditions 
set  down  in  the  Pastor  JEternns,  for  the  exercise  of  infallibility: 
viz.,  the  proposition  defined  will  be  without  anv  claim  to  be  con- 
sidered binding  on  the  belief  of  Catholics,  unless  it  is  referable 
to  the  Apostolic  depositum,  through  the  channel  either  of  Scrip- 
ture or  Tradition ;  and,  though  the  Pope  is  the  judge  whether  it 
is  so  referable  or  not,  yet  the  necessity  of  his  professing  to  abide 
by  this  reference  is  in  itself  a  certain  limitation  of  his  dogmatic 
action.  A  Protestant  will  object  indeed  that,  after  his  distinctly 
asserting  that  the  Immaculate  Conception  and  the  Papal  Infallibil- 
ity are  in  Scripture  and  Tradition,  this  safeguard  against  errone- 
ous definitions  is  not  worth  much,  nor  do  1  say  that  it  is  one  of  the 
most  effective;  but  anyhow,  in  consequence  of  it,  no  Pope  any  more 
than  a  Council  could,  for  instance,  introduce  Ignatius' s  Epistles 
into  the  Canon  of  Scripture ;— and  as  to  his  dogmatic  condemnar 
tion  of  particular  books,  which,  of  course,  are  foreign  to  the  de- 
positnm,  I  would  say,  that,  as  to  their  false  doctrine  there  can  be 
no  difficulty  in  condemning  that  by  means  of  that  Apostolic  de- 
posit; nor  surely  in  his  condemning  the  very  wording,  in  which 
they  convey  it,  when  the  subject  is  carefully  considered.  For  the 
Pope's  condemning  the  language,  for  instance,  of  Jansenius  is  a 
parallel  act  to  the  Church's  receiving  the  word  "  Consubstantial," 
and  if  a  Council  and  the  Pope  were  not  infallible  so  far  in  their 
judgment  of  language,  neither  the  Pope  nor  Council  could  draw- 
up  a  dogmatic  definition  at  all,  for  the  right  exercise  of  words  is 
involved  in  the  right  exercise  of  thought. 

10.  And  in  like  manner,  as  regards  the  precepts  concerning 
moral  duties,  it  is  not  in  every  such  precept  that  the  Pope  is  in- 
fallible. As  a  definition  of  faith  must  be  drawn  from  the  Apos- 
tolic depositum  of  doctrine,  in  order  that  it  may  be  considered  an 
exercise  of  infallibility,  whether  in  the  Pope  or  a  Council,  so  too 
a  precept  of  morals,  if  it  is  to  be  accepted  as  dogmatic,  must  be 
drawn  from  the  Moral  law,  that  primary  revelation  to  us  from 
God. 


ti 


^1 


116 


IHB  VATICAN  DEFIKITION. 


THB  VATICAN  DEFINITION. 


117 


ill 


That  in,  in  the  first  place,  it  must  relate  to  thingp  in  thciii»elve« 
good  or  evil  If  the  Pope  prescribed  lying  or  revenge,  hw  com- 
muid  would  simply  go  for  nothing,  as  if  he  had  not  issued  it,  be- 
Minse  be  has  no  power  over  the  Moral  Law.  If  he  forbade  hia 
ioek  to  eat  any  but  vegetable  food,  or  to  drcsa  in  a  particular 
iishion  (questions  of  decency  or  modesty  not  coming  into  the 
question),  he  would  in  like  manner  be  going  beyond  his  province, 
because  such  a  rule  does  not  relate  to  a  matter  in  itself  good  or 
UA,  If  he  gave  a  precept  all  over  the  world  for  the  adoption  of 
lotteries  instead  of  tithes  or  offerings,  certainly  it  would  be  very 
bard  to  prove  that  he  was  contradicting  the  Moral  Law,  or  rubng 
a  practice  to  be  in  itself  good  which  was  in  itself  evil.  There  are 
few  persons  but  would  allow  that  it  is  at  least  doubtful  whether 
lotteries  are  abstractedly  evil,  and  in  a  doubtful  matter  the  Pope 
is  to  believed  and  obeyed.  . ,       . .  r 

Hiiwever,  there  are  other  conditions  besides  this,  necessary  for 
tbe  eiewise  of  Papal  infallibility  in  moral  subjects :— for  instance, 
bis  deinition  must  relate  to  things  necessary  for  salvation.  No 
one  would  so  speiik  of  lotteries,  nor  of  a  particular  dress,  or  of  a 
particular  kind  of  food ;— such  precepts,  then,  did  he  make  them, 
would  be  simply  external  to  the  range  of  his  prerogative. 

And  again,  his  infallibility  in  consequence  is  not  called  into 
emeiuise, unless  he  speaks  to  the. whole  viorld;  for,  if  his  precepts, 
in  order  to  be  dogmatic,  must  enjoin  what  is  necessary  to  salvar 
tion,  they  must  be  necessary  for  all  men.  Accordingly  orders 
which  issue  from  him  for  the  observance  of  particular  countries, 
©r  political  or  religioaa  claases,  have  no  claim  to  be  the  utterances 
of  bis  infallibility.  If  be  enjoins  upon  the  hierarchv  of  Ifeland 
to  withstand  mixed  education,  this  is  no  exercise  of  his  inlalli- 
bilitv 

It  mav  be  added  that  the  field  of  morals  contains  so  little  that 
Is  unknown  and  unexplored,  in  contrast  with  revelation  and  doc- 
trinal fact,  which  form  the  domain  of  faith,  that  it  is  difficult  to 
say  what  portions  of  moral  teachinje  in  the  course  of  1800  years 
autnolly  have  proceeded  from  the  Pope,  or  from  the  Church,  or 
whef©  to  look  for  such.    Nearly  all  that  either  oracle  has  done 
in  this  respect,  has  been  to  condemn  such  propositions  as  in  a 
moral  point  of  view  are  fabe,  of  dangerous,  or  rash ;  and  these 
Dondemnations,  besides  being  such  as  in  fact,  will  be  found  to 
mmiiuid  the  assent  of  most  men,  as  soon  as  heard,  do  not  neces- 
earilj  go  so  far  as  to  present  any  positive  statements  for  univer- 
sal acceptance.  .  .       x        v        ui. 
11.  With  the  mention  of  condemned  propositions  I  am  brought 
to  another  and  large  consideration,  which  is  one  of  the  best  il- 
Instnitions  that  I  can  give  of  that  principle  of  minimizing  so 
n^oassttiy,  as  I  think,  tor  a  wise  and  cautious  theolo^ ;  at  the 
saine  time  I  can  not  insist  upon  it  in  the  connection  into  which 
I  am  going  to  introduce  it,  without  submitting  myself  to  the  cor- 
rection  of  divines  more  learned  than  I  can  pretend  to  be  myself 
The  infallibility,  whether  of  the  Church  or  of  the  Pope,  acts 
pianipally  or  solely  in  two  channels,  in   direct  sfaitements  of 
taith,  and  in  the  condemnation  of  error.    The  former  takes  the 


shape  of  doctrinal  definitions,  the  latter  stigmatises  propositions 
as  heretical,  next  to  heresy,  erroneous,  and  the  like.  In  each 
case  the  Church,  as  guided  W  her  Divine  Master,  has  made  pro- 
vision for  weighing  as  lightly  as  possible  on  the  faith  and  con- 
science of  her  children. 

As  to  the  condemnation  of  propositions  all  she  tells  us  is,  that 
the  thesis  condemned  when  taken  as  a  whole,  or,  apin,  when 
viewed  in  its  context,  is  heretical,  or  blasphemous,  or  impious,  or 
whatever  other  epithet  she  affixes  to  it  We  have  only  to  trust 
her  so  far  as  to  allow  ourselves  to  be  warned  against  the  thesis, 
or  the  work  containing  it.  Theologians  employ  themselves  in 
determining  what  precisely  it  is  that  is  condemned  in  that  thesis, 
or  treatise;  and  doubtless  in  most  cases  thev  do  so  with  success; 
but  that  determination  is  not  de  jide ;  all  that  is  of  faith  is  that 
there  is  in  that  thesis  itself,  which  is  noted,  heresy  or  error,  or 
other  peccant  matter,  as  the  case  ma^  be,  such,  that  the  censure 
is  a  peremptory  command  to  theologians,  preachers,  students,  and 
all  other  whom  it  concerns,  to  keep  clear  of  it.  But  so  light  is 
this  obligation,  that  instances  frequently  occur,  when  it  is  suc- 
cessfully maintained  by  some  new  writer,  that  the  Pope's  act 
does  not  imply  what  it  has  seemed  to  imply,  and  questions  which 
seemed  to  be  closed,  are  after  a  course  of  years  re-opened.  In 
discussions  such  as  these,  there  is  a  real  exercise  of  private  judg- 
ment, and  an  allowable  one ;  the  act  of  faith,  which  can  not  be 
superseded  or  trifled  with,  being,  I  repeat,^  the  unreserved  W3- 
ceptance  that  the  thesis  in  question  is  heretical,  or  erroneous  in 
faith,  etc.,  as  the  Pope  or  the  Church  has  spoken  of  it. 

In  these  cases,  which  in  a  true  sense  may  be  called  the  Pope's 
negatioe  enunciations,  the  opportunity  of  a  legitimate  minimis- 
ing lies  in  the  intensely  concrete  character  of  the  matters  con- 
demned ;  in  his  affirmative  enunciations  a  like  opportunity  is  af- 
forded by  their  being  more  or  less  abstract.  Indeed,  excepting 
such  as  relate  to  persons,  that  is,  to  the  Trinity  in  Unity,  the 
Blessed  Virgin,  the  Saints,  and  the  like,  all  the  dogmas  of  Pope 
or  of  Council  are  but  general,  and  so  far,  in  consequence,  admit 
of  exceptions  in  their  actual  application, — ^these  exceptions  being 
determined  either  by  other  authoritative  utterances,  or  by  the 
scrutinizing  vigilance,  acuteness,  and  subtlety  of  the  Schola 
T  heologorum. 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  instances  of  what  I  am  insisting 
on  is  found  in  a  dogma,  which  no  Catholic  can  ever  think  of 
disputing,  viz.,  that  "Out  of  the  Church,  and  out  of  the  faith, 
is  no  salvation."  Not  to  go  to  Scripture,  it  is  the  doctrine  of  St. 
Ignatius,  St.  Irenaeus,  St.  Cyprian  m  the  first  three  centuries,  as 
of  St.  Augustine  and  his  contemporaries  in  the  fourth  and  fifth. 
It  can  never  be  other  than  an  elementary  truth  of  Christianity ; 
and  the  present  Pope  has  proclaimed  it  as  all  Popes,  doctors,  and 
bishops  before  him.  But  that  truth  has  two  aspects,  according 
as  the  force  of  the  negative  falls  upon  the  "Church"  or  upon 
the  "  salvation."  The  main  sense  is,  that  there  is  no  other  com- 
munion or  so-called  Church,  but  the  Catholic,  in  which  are  stored 
the  promises,  the  sacraments,  and  other  means  of  salvation:  th6 


118 


TMi  vAimm  mmmmm. 


4i 


other  and  derived  sense  is,  thai  no  one  can  be  mved  who  is  not 
in  that  one  and  only  Church.  But  it  does  not  follow,  because 
there  is  no  Church  but  one  which  has  the  Evangelical  gifts  and 
privileges  to  bestow,  that  therefore  no*  one  can  be  saved  without 
the  intervention  of  that  one  Church.  Anglicans  quite  under- 
stood this  distinction ;  for,  on  the  one  hand,  their  Article  says, 
"They  are  to  be  had  accursed  (anathematizandi)  that  presume  to 
say,  that  every  man  shall  be  saved  by  (in)  the  law  or  sect  which 
lie  profesj«eth,  so  that  he  be  diligent  to  frame  his  life  according  to 
Unit  law  and  the  light  of  nature ; "  while  on  the  other  hand  iXiej 
wprn^  of  and  hold  flie  doctrine  of  the  *'  uncovenanted  mercies  of 
(fid/'  The  latter  doctrine  in  its  Catholic  form  is  the  doctrine  of 
invincible  ignorance— or,  that  it  is  possible  to  belong  to  the  soul 
of  th©  Church  without  belonging  to  the  bod^ ;  and,  at  the  end  of 
1,800  years,  it  has  been  formally  and  authoritatively  put  forward 
by  the  present  Pope  (the  first  Popje,  I  suppose,  who  has  done  so), 
on  the  very  same  occasion  on  which  he  has  repeated  the  funda- 
mental  principle  of  exclusive  salvation  itself  It  is  to  the  pur- 
pose here  to  auote  his  words;  they  occur  in  the  course  of  his 
Encyclical,  addressed  to  the  Bishops  of  Italy,  under  date  of 
August  10, 18t>3 :  ^     , 

*•  We  and  you  hwWt  that  those  who  lie  under  invincible  ignor- 
ance as  regards  our  most  Holy  Religion,  and  who,  diligently  ob- 
serving the  natural  law,  and  its  precepts,  which  are  engraven  by 
God  on  the  hearts  of  all,  and  prepared  to  obey  God,  lead  a  good 
and  upright  life,  are  able,  by  the  operation  of  the  power  of 
divine  light  and  grace,  to  obtain  eternal  life."  * 

Who  would  at  first  sight  gather  from  the  wording  of  so  forci- 
bl©  a  universal,  that  an  exception  to  its  operation,  such  as  this, 
■o  distinct,  and.  for  what  we  know,  so  very  wide,  was  consistent 
with  holding  it? 

Another  instance  of  ft  similar  kind  is  the  general  acceptance 
in  the  Latin  Church,  since  the  time  of  St.  Augustine,  of  the  doc- 
trine of  absolute  predestination,  as  instanced  m  the  teaching  of 
other  great  saints  beside  him,  such  as  St.  Fulgentius,  St.  Prosner, 
8t  Gregory,  St.  Thomaa,  and  St.  Buonaventure.  Yet  in  the  last 
centuries  a  great  explanation  and  modification  of  this  doctrine 
has  been  effected  by  the  efforts  of  the  Jesuit  School,  which  have 
issued  in  the  reception  of  a  distinction  between  predestination  to 
gnee  ftnd  predestination  to  glory ;  and  a  consequent  admission 
of  Hie  principle  that,  though  our  own  works  do  not  avail  for 
bringing  us  into  a  state  of  salvation  on  earth,  they  do  ftvail,  when 
in  that  state  of  salvation  or  grace,  for  our  attainment  of  eternal 
rfery  in  heaven.  Two  saints  of  late  centuries,  St.  Francis  de 
Me©  and  St  Alfonso,  seem  to  have  professed  this  less  rigid 
opinion,  which  is  now  the  more  oommon  doctrine  of  the  day. 


♦  Th©  Pope  speaks  more  forcibly  still  in  an  earlier  Allocution. 
After  mentioning  invincible  Ignorance,  he  adds :  "  Quis  tantum  sibi 
arroget,  nt  hujusmodi  ignorantiae  designare  Umites  queat,  juxta  pop- 
uloram,  regionuni,  ingeniorum,  aliarumque  rerum  tam  multarum 
rationem  et  varietatem  ?  ^'—Jke,  9, 1854. 


THE  VATICAN   DEFINITION. 


119 


Another  instance  is  supplied  by  the  Papal  decisions  concern- 
ing Usury.  Pope  Clement  v.,  in  the  Council  of  Vienne,  declares, 
•'  ft  any  one  shall  have  fallen  into  the  error  of  pertinaciously 
presuming  to  afl&rm  that  usury  is  no  sin,  we  determine  that  he  is 
to  be  punished  as  a  heretic."  However,  in  the  year  1831  the  Sa- 
cred rcenitentiaria  answered  an  inquiry  on  the  subject,  to  the 
effect  that  the  Holy  See  suspended  its  decision  on  the  point,  and 
that  a  confessor  who  allowed  of  usury  was  not  to  be  disturbed, 
*•  non  esse  inquietandum."  Here  again  a  double  aspect  seems  to 
have  been  remixed  of  the  idea  intended  by  the  word  usury. 

To  show  how  natural  this  process  of  partial  and  gradually  de- 
veloped teaching  is,  we  may  refer  to  the  apparent  contradiction 
of  Bellarmine,  who  says  "  the  Pope,  whether  he  can  err  or  not, 
is  to  be  obeyed  by  all  the  faithful,"  (Rom.  Pont.  iv.  2),  yet,  as  I 
have  quoted  him  above,  p.  52-53,  sets  down  (ii.  29)  cases  in 
which  he  is  not  to  be  obeyed.  An  illustration  may  be  given  in 
political  history  in  the  discussions  which  took  place  years  ago  as 
to  the  force  of  the  Sovereign's  Coronation  Oath  to  uphold  the  Es- 
tablished Church.  The  words  were  large  and  general,  and 
seemed  to  preclude  any  act  on  his  part  to  the  prejudice  of  the 
Establishment;  but  lawyers  succeeded  at  length  m  making  a  dis- 
tinction between  the  legislative  and  executive  action  of  the 
Crown,  which  is  now  generally  accepted. 

These  instances  out  of  many  similar  are  sufficient  to  show 
what  caution  is  to  be  observed,  on  the  part  of  private  and  unau- 
thorized persons,  in  imposing  upon  tne  consciences  of  others 
any  interpretation  of  dogmatic  enunciations  which  is  beyond  the 
legitimate  sense  of  the  words,  inconsistent  with  the  principle 
that  all  general  rules  have  exceptions,  and  unrecognized  by  the 
Theological  Schola. 

12.  From  these  various  considerations  it  follows,  that  Papal 
and  Synodal  definitions,  obligatory  on  our  faith,  are  of  rare  oc- 
currence ;  and  this  is  confessed  by  all  sober  theologians.  Father 
O'Reilly,  for  instance,  of  Dublin,  one  of  the  first  theologians  of 
the  day,  says: — 

"  The  Papal  Infallibility  is  comparatively  seldom  brought  into 
action.  I  am  very  far  from  denving  that  the  Vicar  of  Christ  is 
largely  assisted  by  God  in  the  fulfillment  of  his  sublime  office, 
that  he  receives  great  light  and  strength  to  do  well^  the  great 
work  entrusted  to  him  and  imposed  on  him,  that  he  is  continu- 
ally guided  from  above  in  the  government  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  But  this  is  not  the  meaninj^  of  Infallibility.  .  .  What 
is  the  use  of  dragging  in  the  Infallibility  in  connection  with  Pa- 
pal acts  with  which  it  has  nothing  to  do  ?  Papal  acts,  which 
are  very  good  and  very  holy,  and  entitled  to  all  respect  and  obe- 
dience, acts  in  which  the  Pontiff  is  commonly  not  mistaken,  but 
in  which  he  could  be  mistaken  and  still  remain  infallible  in  the 
only  sense  in  which  he  has  been  declared  to  be  so."  (The  Irish 
Monthly,  vol.  ii.  No.  10,  1874.)* 

This  great  authority  goes  on  to  disclaim  any  desire  to  minimize, 

•Vid.  Fessler  also ;  and  I  hclicvc  Father  Perrone  says  the  same. 


H 


120 


€0IIOL€8KHr. 


bilk  there  i%  I  hope,  no  real  difference  betneen  ne  here.  He,  I 
am  sure,  would  sanction  me  in  my  repugnance  to  impose  upon 
the  faith  of  others  mure  than  what  the  Church  distinctly  claims 
of  them  :  and  I  should  follow  him  in  thinkine  it  a  more  scriptu- 
ral, Christian,  dutiful,  happy  frame  of  mind  to  be  easy,  than  to 
bo  diUcult,  of  belief.  I  hate  already  spoken  of  that  uncatholic 
spirit,  which  starts  with  a  grudgini  faith  in  the  word  of  the 
Church,  and  determines  to  hold  nothing  but  what  it  is,  as  if  by 
draionstration,  compelled  to  believe.  To  be  a  true  Catholic  a  man 
nmst  have  a  senerous  loyalty  towards  ecclesiastical  authority,  and 
aeoept  what  is  taught  him  with  what  is  called  the  pietat  fidei, 
and  only  luch  a  tone  of  mind  has  a  claim,  and  it  certainly,  has  m 
jilaim.,  to  be  met  and  to  be  handled  with  a  wise  and  gentle  wttil- 
mifiii.  Still  the  fact  remains,  that  there  has  been  of  late  years 
a  ierce  and  intolerant  temper  abroad,  which  seoms  and  virtually 
trainplet  on  the  little  ones  of  Christ. 

I  and  with  an  extract  from  the  Pastoral  of  the  Swiss  Bishops, 
a  Fastoiml  which  has  received  the  Pope's  approbation : 

**lt  in  no  way  depends  upon  the  caprice  of  the  Pope,  or  upon 
his  good  pleasure,  to  make  80ch  and  such  a  doctrine  the  object  of 
a  dogmalic  definition.^  He  is  tied  up  and  limited  to  the  divine 
revcESon,  and  to  the  truths  which  that  revelation  contains.  Ho 
is  tied  up  and  limited  by  the  Creeds,  alreadv  in  existence,  and  by 
Ihi  preoeding  deinitions  of  the  Church.  He  is  tied  up  and  lim- 
ited by  the  divine  law,  and  by  the  constitution  of  the  Church. 
Lastly,  he  is  tied  up  and  limited  by  that  doctrine,  divinely  re- 
¥«iled,  which  affirms  that  alongside  relidous  society  there  is  civil 
aCMitif ,  that  alonuEside  the  Ecclesiastical  Hierarchy,  there  is  the 
power  of  temporal  magistrates,  invested  in  their  own  domain 
with  a  full  sovereignty,  and  to  whom  we  owe  obedience  in  con- 
ieieae®,  and  respect  in  all  things  morally  permitted,  and  belong- 
ing to  the  domain  of  civil  society."  • 

{  10.   CONCLUSIOK. 

I  have  now  said  all  that  I  consider  necessary  in  order  to  liilfill 
tii#  task  which  I  have  undertaken,  a  task  very  painful  to  me  and 
ungracious.  I  account  it  a  great  misfortune,  that  my  last  words, 
as  they  are  likely  to  be,  should  be  devoted  to  a  controversy  with 
mm  whom  I  have  always  so  much  respected  and  admired.  But  I 
■houM  not  have  been  satisfied  with  myself,  if  I  had  not  responded 
to  the  oill  made  upon  me  from  such  various  quarters,  to  the  op- 
portunity at  last  given  me  of  breaking  a  long  silence  on  subjects 
daeply  intoresting  to  me,  and  to  the  demands  of  my  own  honor. 

The  main  point  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  charge  against  us  is  that 
in  1870,  after  a  series  of  nreparatory  acts,  a  great  change  and 
itwversible  was  effected  in  the  political  attitude  of  the  Church  by 
the  third  and  fourth  chapters  of  the  Vatican  Pastor  jEtemtis,  a 
change  which  no  state  or  statesmnn  can  afford  to  pass  over.  Of 
this  iSardinal  assertion  I  consider  he  has  given  no  proof  at  all; 
and  my  object  throughout  the  foregoing  pages  has  been  to  make 


CONCLUSION. 


121 


this  clear.  The  Pope's  infallibility  indeed,  and  his  supreme  au- 
thority, have  in  the  Vatican  capita  been  declared  matters  of  faith ; 
but  his  preroj2;ative  of  infallibility  lies  in  matters  speculative,  and 
his  prerogative  of  authority  is  no  infallibility,  in  laws,  com- 
mands, or  measures.  His  infallibility  bears  upon  the  domain  of 
thouffht,  not  directly  of  action,  and  while  it  may  fairly  exercise 
the  theologian,  philosopher,  or  man  of  science,  it  scarcely  con- 
cerns the  politician.  Moreover,  whether  the  recognition  of  his 
infallibility  in  doctrine  will  increase  his  actual  power  over  the 
faith  of  Catholics,  remains  to  be  seen,  and  must  be  determined  by 
the  event;  for  there  are  gifts  too  large  and  too  fearful  to  be 
handled  freely.  Mr.  Gladstone  seems  to  feel  this,  and  therefore 
insists  upon  the  increase  made  by  the  Vatican  definition  in  the 
Pope's  authority.  But  there  is  no  real  increase ;  he  has  for  cen- 
turies upon  centuries  had  and  used  that  authority,  which  the 
Definition  now  declares  ever  to  have  belonged  to  him.  Before 
the  Council  there  was  the  rule  of  obedience,  and  there  were  ex- 
ceptions to  the  rule ;  and  since  the  Council  the  rule  remains,  and 
with  it  the  possibility  of  exceptions. 

It  may  be  objected  that  a  representation  such  as  this,  is  nega- 
tived by  the  universal  sentiment  which  testifies  to  the  formidable 
effectiveness  of  the  Vatican  decrees,  and  to  the  Pope's  intention 
that  they  should  be  effective;  that  it  is  the  boast  of  some  Cath- 
olics and  the  reproach  levelled  against  us  by  all  Protestants,  that 
the  Catholic  Church  has  now  become  beyond  mistake  a  despotic 
aggressive  Papacy,  in  which  freedom  of  thought  and  action  is 
utterly  extinguished.  But  I  do  not  allow  this  alleged  unanimous 
testimony  to  exist.  Of  course  Prince  Bismarck  and  other  states- 
men such  as  Mr.  Gladstone,  rest  their  opposition  to  Pope  Pius 
on  the  political  ground ;  but  the  old  Catholic  movement  is  based, 
not  upon  politics,  but  upon  theology,  and  Dr.  Dollinger  has  more 
than  once,  I  believe,  declared  his  disapprobation  of  the  Prussian 
acts  against  the  Pope,  while  Father  Hyacinth  has  quarreled  with 
the  unti-CathoIic  politics  of  Geneva  The  French  indeed  have 
shown  their  sense  of  the  political  support  which  the  Holy  Father's 
name  and  influence  would  bring  to  their  country ;  but  does  any 
one  suppose  that  they  expect  to  derive  support  definitely  from  the 
Vatican  decrees,  and  not  rather  from  the  prestige  of  that  venerable 
Authority,  which  those  decrees  have  rather  lowered  than  other- 
wise in  the  eyes  of  the  world  ?  So  again  the  Legitimists  and  ('ar- 
lists  in  France  and  Spain  doubtless  wish  to  associate  themselves 
with  Rome ;  but  where  and  how  have  they  signified  that  they  can 
turn  to  proiSt  the  special  dogma  of  the  Pope's  infallibility,  and 
would  not  have  been  better  pleased  to  be  rid  of  the  controversy 
which  it  has  occasioned  ?  In  fact,  instead  of  there  beinj;  a  uni- 
versal impression  that  the  proclamation  of  his  infallibility  and 
supreme  authority  has  strengthened  the  Pope's  secular  position 
in  £urope,  there  is  room  for  suspecting  that  some  of  the  politi- 
cians or  the  day,  (I  do  not  mean  Mr.  Gladstone)  were  not  sorry 
that  the  Ultramontane  party  was  successful  at  the  Council  in 
their  prosecution  of  an  object  which  those  politicians  considered 
to  be  favorable  to  the  interests  of  the  Civil  power.     There  is  cer- 


i 


122 


a>N€L'USIO!f. 


CONCLUSION, 


123 


toinly  «ome  Blansibility  in  the  view,  that  it  is  not  the  "Curia  R^ 
mum:*  as  Mr.  Gladntone  considers,  or  the  Jesuits,  who  are  the 
••ijitiitii"  party,  but  that  rather  they  are  themselves  vicUms  ot 
lliitt  asliitoiiess  of  secular  statesmen.  ^u^^r..^ 

The  recognition,  which  1  am  here  implying,  of  the  existenc© 
of  parties  iS  the  Church  reminds  me  of  what,  while  I  have  been 
wrUinc  these  pages,  I  have  all  along  felt  would  be  at  once  the 
prima  fmie  and  also  the  most  telling  criticism  upon  me.    It  will 
be  said  that  there  are  very  considerable  differences  in  argument 
and  opinion  between  me  and  others  who  have  replied  to  Mr. 
Gladstone,  and  1  shall  be  taunted  with  the  evident  break-down, 
thereby  made  manifest,  of  that  topic  of  glorification  so  com- 
monly in  the  mouths  of  Catholics,  that  they  arc  aU  of  one  way 
of  thinkinff,  while  Protestants  are  all  at  variance  with  each  other, 
and  by  that  very  variation  of  opinion  can  have  no  ground  of  cer- 
tainty severally  in  their  <»wn.  ^  . 
This  is  a  showy  and  serviceable  retort  m  controversy ;  'J^J^  " 
is  nothing  more.    First,  as  regards  the  areuments  which  Cath- 
olics use,  it  has  to  be  considered  whether  they  are  really  mcom- 
matihle  with  eaich  other;  if  they  are  not,  then  surely  it  w  gener- 
Illy  granted  by  Protestants  as  well  as  Cathohcs,  that  two  distinct 
arfiiSients  for  the  same  conclusion,  instead  of  invalidating  that 
conclusion,  actually  strengthen  it.     And  next,  suiiposing  the  dif- 
ference to  be  one  of  conclusions  themselves,  then  it  must  De  con- 
sidered whether  the  difference  relates  to  a  matter  of  faith  or  to  a 
matter  of  opinion.     If  a  matter  of  faith  is  in  question  I  grant 
there  ought  to  be  absolute  agreement,  or  rather  I  maintain  that 
there  is;  I  mean  to  say  that  only  one  out  of  the  »^fe"*««*«  P"* 
forth  can  l>e  true,  and  that- the  other  statements  will  be  at  once 
withdrawn  by  their  authors,  by  virtue  of  their  being  Catholics, 
as  soon  as  they  learn  on  good  authority  that  they  are  erroneous. 
But  if  the  differences  which  I  have  supposed  are  only  in  theo- 
logical opinion,  they  do  but  show  that  a^r  all  private  J»%ment 
is  not  so  utterly  unknown  among  Catholics  and  in  Catholic 
Schools,  as  Protestants  are  desirous  to  establish,         ^ 

I  have  written  on  this  subject  at  some  length  m  Lectures 
which  I  published  many  years  ago,  but,  it  would  appear,  wiUi 
little  practical  effect  upon  those  for  whom  they  were  intended. 
•*  Left  to  himself,"  I  say.  "  each  Catholic  likes  and  would  main- 
fciin  his  own  opinion  and  his  private  judgment  just  as  much  as  a 
Protestant;  and  he  has  it  and  he  maintains  it.  just  so  far  as  the 
Church  does  not,  liy  the  authority  of  Revelation,  supersede  it^ 
The  very  moment  the  Church  ceases  to  speak,  at  the  very  point 
at  which  she.  that  is,  God  who  speaks  by  her,  circumscribes  her 
range  of  teaching,  then  private  judgment  of  necessity  starts  up: 
the?e  is  nothing  to  hinder  it.  .  .  A  Catholic  sacrifices  his  opinion 
to  the  Word  of  God.  declared  through  His  Church ;  but  from  «ie 
nature  of  the  case,  there  is  nothing  to  hinder  him  having  ms 
cwn  OBinion  and  expressing  it,  whenever,  and  so  far  as,  the 
Church,  the  oracle  of  Revelation,  docs  not  speak. 

*'VMe  "  Difficulties  felt  by  AngUcama."    IiCctnre  X. 


In  saying  this,  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  I  am  denying 
what  is  called  the  pietas  Jideiy  that  is,  a  sense  of  the  great  prob- 
ability of  the  truth  of  enunciations  made  by  the  Church,  which 
are  not  formally  and  actually  to  be  considered  as  the  "Word  of 
God."  Doubtless  it  is  our  duty  to  check  many  a  speculation, « or 
at  least  many  an  utterance,  even  though  we  are  not  bound  to  con- 
demn it  as  contrary  to  religious  truth.  But,  after  all,  the  field  of 
religious  thought  which  the  duty  of  faith  occupies,  is  small  in- 
deed compared  with  that  which  is  open  to  our  free,  though  of 
course  to  our  reverent  and  conscientious  speculation. 

I  draw  from  these  remarks  two  conclusions :  first,  as  regards 
Protestants, — Mr.  Gladstone  should  not  on  the  one  hand  declaim 
against  us  as  having  "no  mental  freedom,"  if  the  periodical 
press  on  the  other  hand  is  to  mock  us  as  admitting  a  liberty  of 
private  judgment,  purely  Protestant.  We  surely  are  not  open  to 
contradictory  imputations.  Every  note  of  triumph  over  the  dif- 
ferences which  mark  our  answers  to  Mr.  Gladstone  is  a  distinct 
admission  that  we  do  not  deserve  his  injurious  reproach  that  we 
are  captives  and  slaves  of  the  Pope. 

Secondly,  for  the  benefit  of  some  Catholics,  I  would  observe 
that,  while  I  acknowledged  one  Pope,  jure  divino,  I  acknowledge 
no  other,  and  that  I  think  it  a  usurpation,  too  wicked  to  be  com- 
fortably dwelt  upon,  when  individuals  use  their  own  private  judg- 
ment, m  the  discussion  of  religious  questions,  not  simply  "abun- 
dare  in  suo  sensu,"  but  for  the  purpose  of  anathematizing  the 
private  judgment  of  others. 

I  say  there  is  only  one  Oracle  of  God,  the  Holy  Catholic 
Church  and  the  Pope  as  her  head.  To  her  teaching  1  have  ever 
desired  all  my  thoughts,  all  my  words  to  be  conformed;  to  her 
judgment  I  submit  what  I  have  now  written,  what  I  have  ever 
written,  not  only  as  regards  its  truth,  but  as  to  its  prudence,  its 
suitableness,  and  its  expedience.  I  think  I  have  not  pursued  any 
end  of  my  own  in  any  thing  that  I  have  published,  but  I  know 
well,  that,  in  matters  not  of  faith,  I  may  have  spoken  when  I 
ought  to  have  been  silent. 

And  now,  my  dear  Duke,  I  release  you  from  this  long  discus- 
sion, and,  in  concluding,  beg  you  to  accept  the  best  Christmas 
wishes  and  prayers  for  your  present  and  future  from 
Tour  affectionate  Friend  and  Servant, 

JOHN  HENRY  NEWMAN. 
The  Oratory,  December  27,  1874. 


u 


ARCHBISHOP  MAMING'S  REPLY. 


PKEFAOK 


A  finK  both  difficalt  and  unlooked  for  lias  eaddenly  Men  to 
my  lotT  that  is,  to  gain  a  fair  hearing  on  subjects  about  which 
m  opiiions,  and  still  more  the  feeling«.  of  so  many  men  are  not 
unly  idverse,  but  even  hostile.  1  must,  therefore,  ask  for  patience 
imm  those  who  may  read  these  pages. 

The  tonics  here  treated  have  not  been  chosen  by  me.  mey 
haire  bee^  raised  by  Mr.  Gladstone,  and  perhaps,  ma  1  the  range 
f»f  Religion  and  Politics,  none  can  be  found  more  delicato  more 
beset  with  misconceptions,  or  more  prejudged  by  old  trad itionaijf 
beliefs  and  antipathies.  Some  of  them  t(>o.  are  of  an  odious 
lund;  others  revive  memories  we  would  flvm  forget  And  yet, 
if  Mr.  Gladstone's  appeal  to  me  is  to  be  answered,  treated  they 
must  be.  My  replj  to  the  argument  of  the  Expc^tulation  on  tl^e 
Vatican  CouncU  will  be  founf  in  the  first,  second,  and  fifth  chaiH 
ters:  but  as  Mr.  Gladstone  has  brought  into  his  impeachment  the 
present  conflict  in  Germany,  and  has  reviewed  his  own  conduct 
L  respect  to  the  RevoUition  in  Ibily,  I  have  felt  myself  obliged 
to  follow  him.  ^rhis  1  have  done  in  the  third  and  fourth  chapters. 
Apart  from  this  reason.  I  felt  myself  bound  to  do  so  by  the  terms 
of  the  two  letters  printed  at  the  opening  of  the  allowing  p»gc8. 
I  hold  myself  pledged  to  justify  their  contents.  Moreover  these 
two  topics  fall  witlin  the  outline  of  the  *iubjcct  treated  by  Mr. 
Gladstone,  which  is.  the  relation  of  the  Supreme  ^P";^^;^^^^^^ 
of  the  Head  of  the  Christian  Church  to  the  Civil  Powers  of  all 
countries.     So  much  for  the^mattor  of  these  Ff«-  ,       . 

As  for  the  manner,  if  it  be  faulty,  the  fault  is  mine :  and  yG% 
iiere  ought  to  be  no  fault  imputed  where  ^^^^'^.^l?*!. ^^"^^ "*^,  'Z 
tention  to  wound  or  to  offend.  I  ct^n  say  with  truth  that,  to 
»TOid  offense.  I  have  weighed  my  words,  and  if  *J«f .  ^  .^°«/;" 
found  which  ought  not  to  have  been  written.  1  wish  it  to  be 
blotted  out.  The  subject-mattor  is  beyond  my  control.  1  can 
blot  out  words,  but  I  can  not  blot  out  truths.  What  I  believe  to 
be  truth,  that  I  have  said  in  the  clearest  words  and  calmest  that 
1  could  find  to  give  to  it  adequato  expression. 


(126) 


INTRODUCTION. 

Mr.  Gladstone,  in  his  Expostulation  with  the  Catholics  of  the 
British  Empire  on  the   Decrees  of  the  Vatican  Council,  writes 

as  follows : —  ,      ,  .       .    ^^  .u      i.  j* 

"England  is  entitled  to  ask  and  to  know  in  what  way  the  obedi- 
ence required  l>v  the  Pope  and  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  is  to 
be  reconciled  with  the  integrity  of  Civil  Allegiance."*       ^ 

When  I  read  these  words,  I  at  once  recognized  the  ri^ht  of 
the  English  people,  speaking  by  its  legitimate  authorities,  to 
know  from  me  what  I  believe  and  what  I  teach;  but  in  recog- 
nizing this  right  I  am  compelled  to  decline  to  answer  before  any 
other  tribunal,  or  to  any  other  interrogator.  If,  therefore.  I  take 
the  occasion  of  any  such  interrogation,  I  do  not  iiddress  myself 
to  those  who  make  it.  but  to  the  justice  and  to  the  good  sense  of 

the  Christian  people  of  this  country.  y^.    ,^  ..    ^'    t- ^ 

Mr.  Gladstone  followed  up  this  demand  upon  his  Catholic  tcl- 
low-countrymen  by  an  elaborate  argument  to  prove  that  it  is  im- 
possible for  Catholics,  since  the  Vatican  Council,  to  be  loyal 
except  at  the  cost  of  their  fidelity  to  the  Council,  or  faithful  to 
the  Council  except  at  the  cost  of  their  loyalty  to  their  country. 
I  therefore  considered  it  to  be  my  duty  to  lose  no  time  m  making 
the  subjoined  declaration  in  all  our  principal  journals; 

«'giR ^The  gravity  of  the  subject  on  which  I  address  you, 

affecting,  as  it  must,  every  Catholic  in  the  British  Empire  will, 


Vatican  liecrees  m  ineir  oeuruij^  im  v'i*ii^xac.^.c.»v.v,.  -.  -—  -- 
it  a  direct  appeal  to  myself,  both  for  the  office  1  hold  and  for  the 
writings  I  have  published.  I  gladly  acknowledge  the  duty  that 
lies  upon  me  for  both  those  reasons.  I  am  bound  by  the  office  1 
bear  not  to  suffer  a  day  to  pass  without  repelling  from  the  Cath- 
olics of  this  country  the  lightest  imputiition  upon  their  loyalty ; 
and,  for  my  teaching,  I  am  ready  to  show  that  the  principles  1 
have  ever  taught  are  beyond  impeachment  upon  that  score. 

"It  is  true,  indeed,  that  in  page  57  of  the  pamphlet  Mr.  Giad- 
Btone  expresses  his  belief  '  that  many  of  his  Roman  Catholio 
friends  and  fellow-countrymen  are.  to  say  the  least  of  it,  as  good 
citizens  as  himself'     But  as  the  whole  pamphlet  is  an  elaborate 

« *The  Vatican  Decrees  in  their  Bearing  on  Civil  Allegiance/  By 
the  Right  Hon.  W.  E.  Gladstone.    P.  43. 

(127) 


128 


mtmBvmim, 


rNTRODUCTION'. 


129 


argumeni  to  prove  that  the  teaching  of  the  Vatican  Coancil  rcn* 
iera  it  impossible  for  them  to  bo  so,  I  can  not  accept  this  f^rate- 
fnl  acknowledgment,  which  implies  that  they  are  good  citizens 
because  thev  are  at  variance  with  the  Catholic  Church. 

"  1  should  be  wanting  in  duty  to  the  Catholics  of  this  country 
and  to  myself  if  I  did  not  give  a  prompt  contradiction  to  this 
Btatcment,  and  if  I  did  not  with  equal  pnmptness  affirm  that  the 
loysdtv  of  our  civil  allegiance  is,  not  in  spite  of  the  teaching  of  the 
€atho1ic  Church,  hut  because  of  it 

**  The  sum  of  the  argument  in  th©  pamphlet  just  published  to 
the  world  is  this : — ^That  by  the  Vatican  Decrees  such  a  change 
liiis  been  made  in  the  relations  of  Catholics  to  the  civil  power  of 
States,  ^at  it  is  no  longer  possible  for  them  to  render  tlie  same 
undivided  civil  allegiance  as  it  was  poasible  for  Catholics  to  render 
before  the  promulgation  of  thow!  Decrees. 

"  In  answer  to  this  it  is  for  the  present  sufficient  to  affirm — 

"  1.  That  the  Vatican  Decrees  have  in  no  jot  or  tittle  changed 
Hither  the  obligations  or  the  conditions  of  civil  allegiance. 

**2.  That  the  civil  allegiance  of  Catholics  is  as  undivided  as  that 
iif  all  Christians,  and  of  all  men  w^ho  recognize  a  Divine  or  natural 
moral  law. 

**3.  That  the  civil  allegiance  of  no  man  is  unlimited ;  and  there- 
fore the  civil  allegiance  of  all  men  who  believe  in  God,  or  are 
jjoverned  bv  conscience,  is  in  that  sense  divided. 

*'  4.  In  tnis  sense,  and  in  no  other,  can  it  be  said  with  truth  that 
Ihe  civil  alle||iance  of  Cathcjlics  is  divided.  The  civil  allegiance 
of  every  Christian  man  in  England  is  limited  by  conscience  and 
the  law  of  Ood;  and  the  civil  allegiance  of  CSatholics  is  limited 
neither  less  nor  more. 

*'5.  The  public  peace  of  the  British  Empire  has  been  consoli- 
dated in  the  liist  half  century  by  the  elimination  of  religous  oon* 
iicts  and  inequalities  from  our  kws.  The  Empire  of  Germany 
might  have  been  equally  peaceful  and  stable  if  its  statesmen  had 
not  been  tempted  in  an  evil  hour  to  rake  up  the  old  fires  of  relig- 
ious disunion.  The  hand  of  one  man,  more  than  anv  other,  threw 
this  torch  of  discord  into  the  German  Empire.  Tne  history  of 
Germany  will  recc»rd  the  nam©  of  Dr.  Ignatius  von  Dtillinger  as  the 
author  of  this  national  evil.  I  lament,  not  only  to  read  the  name, 
but  to  trace  the  arguments  of  Dr.  von  Dollingojr  in  the  pamphlet 
before  me.  May  God  preserve  these  kingdoms  from  the  public 
and  private  calamities  which  are  visibljr  impending  over  Ger- 
many. The  author  of  the  pamphlet,  in  his  first  line,  assures  us 
that  his  '  purpose  is  not  polemical  but  pacific'  ^  I  am  sorry  that  so 
good  an  intention  should  have  so  widely  erred  in  the  selection  of 
the  means. 

*•  But  my  purpose  is  neither  to  criticise  nor  to  controvert.  My 
desire  and  my  dxitj  as  an  Englishman,  as  a  Catholic,  and  as  a  pas- 
tor, is  to  claim  for  my  flock  and  for  myself  a  civil  allepance  as 
pure,  as  true,  and  as  loyal  as  is  rendered  by  the  distinguished 
author  of  the  pamphlet,  or  by  any  subject  of  ttie  British  Empire. 

"JViwemftcr  7, 1874." 


Subsequently,  in  reply  to  questions  proposed  to  me,  I  further 
wrote  as  follows: — 

"lb  ihe  Editor  of  the  New  York  Herald:" 

"  Dear  Sir, — ^In  answer  to  your  question  as  to  my  statement 
about  the  Vatican  Council,  I  reply  as  follows : 

"I  asserted  that  the  Vatican  Decrees  have  not  changed  by  a  jot 
or  a  tittle  the  obligations  or  conditions  of  the  civil  obedience  of 
Catholics  towards  the  Civil  Powers.  The  whole  of  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's pamphlet  hangs  on  the  contrary  assertion ;  and  falls  with 
it.     In  proof  of  my  assertion  I  add : — 

"  1.  That  the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope  was  a  doctrine  of  Divine 
Faith  before  the  Vatican  Council  was  held.  In  the  second  and 
third  parts  of  a  book  called  '  Petri  Privilegium,'  (Longmans,  1"871), 
I  have  given  more  than  sufficient  evidence  of  this  assertion. 

"2.  That  the  Vatican  Council  simply  declared  an  old  truth,  and 
made  no  new  dogma.  ,  ^      .  .• 

'•  3.  That  the  position  of  Catholics  therefore  m  respect  to  civil 
allegiance,  since  the  Vatican  Council,  is  precisely  what  it  waa 

before  it. 

"  4.  That  the  Civil  Powers  of  the  Christian  world  have  hitherto 
stood  in  peaceful  relation  with  an  Infallible  Church,  and  tliat  rela- 
tion has  been  often  recognized  and  declared  by  the  Church  in  all 
its  Councils.  The  Vatican  Council  had,  therefore,  no  new  matter 
to  treat  in  this  point. 

"5.  That  the  Vatican  Council  has  made  no  decree  whatever  on 
the  subject  of  the  Civil  Powers,  nor  on  civil  allegiance. 

"  This  subject  was  not  so  much  as  proposed.  The  civil  obedi- 
ence of  Catholics  rests  upon  the  natural  law,  and  the  revealed  law 
of  God.  Society  is  founded  in  nature,  and  subjects  are  bound  in 
all  things  lawful  to  obey  their  rulers.  Society,  when  Christian, 
has  higher  sanctions,  and  subjects  are  bound  to  obey  rulers  for  con- 
science sake,  and  because  thp  Powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God. 
Of  all  these  things  the  Vatican  Decrees  can  have  changed  nothing 
because  they  have  touched  nothing.  Mr.  Gladstone's  whole  argu- 
ment hangs  upon  an  erroneous  assertion,  into  which  I  can  only 
suppose  he  has  been  misled  by  his  misplaced  trust  in  Dr.  Dollin- 
ger  and  some  of  his  friends. 

"On  public  and  private  grounds  I  deeply  lament  this  act  of  im- 
prudence, and  but  for  my  belief  in  Mr.  Gladstone's  sincerity  I 
should  say  this  act  of  injustice.  I  lament  it,  as  an  act  out  of  all 
harmony  and  proportion  to  a  great  statesman's  life,  and  as  the  first 
event  that  has  overcast  a  friendship  of  forty-five  years.  His  whole 
public  life  has  hitherto  consolidated  the  Christian  and  cml  peace 
of  these  kingdoms.  This  act,  unless -the  good  providence  of  God 
and  the  good  sense  of  Englishmen  avert  it,  may  wreck  more  than 
the  work  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  public  career,  and  at  the  end  of  a 
long  life  may  tarnish  a  great  name. 

(EC.     ViVm 

•'  Westminster,  ^i?.  10,  1874." 


130 


INTBODUCnOir. 


THt:   VATICAN  DECREES. 


131 


Having  thus  directly  contradicted  the  main  error  of  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's argument,  I  thought  it  my  duty  to  wait.  I  was  certain  that 
two  things  would  foUow:  the  one,  that  for  better  answers  than  any 
that  I  could  make  would  be  promptly  made ;  the  other,  that  cer- 
tain nominal  Catholics,  who  upon  other  occasions  have  done  the 
same,  would  write  letters  to  the  newspapers. 

Both  events  have  come  to  pass.  r.  .^    *  t  ^. 

The  Bishops  of  Birmingham,  Clifton,  and  Salford  have  abun- 
dantly pointed  out  the  mistakes  into  which  Mr.  Gladstone  has 
fallen  on  the  subject  of  the  Vatican  Council;  and  have  fully  vm- 
dieated  the  lovalty  of  Catholics. 

The  handful  of  nominal  Catholics  have  done  their  work;  and 
those  who  hoped  to  find  or  to  make  a  division  among  Catholics 
have  been  disappointed.  It  is  now  seen  that  those  who  r^ect  the 
¥atican  Council  may  be  told  on  our  fingers,  and  the  Catholic 
Church  has  openly  passed  sentence  on  them. 

Having  made  these  declarations,  I  might  have  remained  silent ; 
but  as  in  my  first  letter  I  implied  that  I  was  prepared  to  juwtify 
what  I  had  asserted,  I  gave  notice  that  I  would  do  so.  Having 
passed  my  word,  I  will  keep  it;  and  in  keeping  it  I  will  endeavor 
to  deserve  again  the  acknowledgment  Mr.  Gladstone  has  already 
made.  H©  says  that,  whatever  comes,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned, 
it  will  not  be  "  without  due  notice."  I  will  be  equally  outspoken 
now;  not  because  he  has  challenged  it,  but  because,  so  far  as  I 
know,  I  have  always  tried  to  speak  out.  In  all  these  years  of 
strife  I  have  never  consciously  kept  back,  or  explained  away,  any 
doctrine  of  the  Catholic  Church.  I  will  not  begin  to  do  so  now. 
when  my  time  is  nearly  run.  I  am  afraid  that  in  these  pages  I 
shall  seem  to  obtrude  myself  too  often,  and  too  much.  If  any 
think  so,  I  would  ask  them  to  remember  that  Mr.  Gladstone  has 
laid  me  under  this  necessity  in  these  three  ways : — 

1.  He  has  made  me  the  representative  of  the  Catholic  doctrine 
since  1870,  as  Bishop  Doyle,  he  says,  was  in  better  days. 

2.  He  has  quoted  my  writings  four  times  in  censure. 

3.  He  has  appealed  to  me  as  "  Head  of  the  Papal  Church  in 
England;"  I  may  also  add  as  "The  Oracle."  My  words,  how- 
ever, shall  not  be  ambiguous. 

The  two  letters  given  above  contain  four  assertions ; 

First,  that  the  Decrees  of  the  Vatican  Council  have  changed 
nothing  in  respect  to  the  civil  obedience  of  Catholics. 

Secondly,  that  their  civil  obedience  is  neither  more  nor  less  di- 
vided than  that  of  other  men. 

Thirdly,  that  the  relations  of  the  Spiritual  and  Civil  Powers 
have  been  fixed  from  time  immemorial,  and  are  therefore  after 
the  Vatican  Council  what  they  were  before. 

Fourthly,  that  the  contest  now  waging  abroad  began  in  a  malevo- 
lent and  mischievous  intrigOe  to  instigate  the  Civil  powers  to  op- 
press and  persecute  the  Catliolic  Church. 

The  t%o  first  propositions  shall  be  treated  in  the  first  chapter, 
the  third  in  the  second  chapter,  and  the  last  in  the  third. 

I  will  therefore  endeavor  to  prove  the  following  propositions, 
which  cover  all  the  assertions  I  have  made:^- 


1  That  the  Vatican  Decrees  have  in  no  jot  or  tittle  changed 
either  the  obligations  or  the  conditions  of  Civil  Allegiance. 

2  That  the  relations  of  the  Catholic  Church  to  the  Civil  Powers 
of  the  world  have  been  immutably  fixed  from  the  beginning,  inas- 
much as  they  arise  out  of  the  Divine  Constitution  of  the  Church, 
and  out  of  the  Civil  Society  of  the  natural  order. 

3  That  any  collisions  now  existing  have  been  brought  on  by 
changes,  not  on  the  part  of  the  Catholic  Church,  much  less  of  the 
Vatican  Council,  but  on  the  part  of  the  Civil  Powers,  and  that  by 
reason  of  a  systematic  conspiracy  against  the  Holy  See. 

4.  That  by  these  changes  and  collisions  the  civil  Powers  ot  JliU- 
rope  are  destroying  their  own  stability.        .,.,«,       .,     , 

5  That  the  motive  of  the  Vatican  Council  in  defining  the  In- 
fallibility of  the  Roman  Pontiff  was  not  any  temporal  policy,  nor 
was  it  for  any  temporal  end ;  but  that  it  defined  that  truth  in  the 
face  of  all  temporal  dangers,  in  order  to  guard  the  Divine  deposit 
of  Christianity,  and  to  vindicate  the  divine  certainty  of  faith. 

I.  Meaning  and  Effect  of  the  Vatican  Decrees. 

I.  In  setting  out  to  prove  my  first  proposition—namely,  "  that 
the  Vatican  Decrees  have  in  no  jot  or  tittle  changed  either  the  olj 
ligations  or  the  conditions  of  Civil  Allegiance  —I  fand  myself 
undertaking  to  prove  a  negative.  The  omis  of  proving  that  the 
Vatican  Decrees  have  made  a  change  in  our  civil  allegiance  rests 
upon  those  who  affirm  it.  Till  they  offer  proof  we  might  remain 
silent.  It  would  be  enough  for  us  to  answer  that  the  Vatican 
Council  in  its  Dogmatic  Constitution  on  the  Church  has  simply 
affirmed  the  revealed  doctrine  of  the  Spiritual  Primacy,  and  of 
the  Infallibility  of  the  Visible  Head  of  the  Christian  Church; 
that  the  relations  of  this  Primacy  to  the  Civil  Powers  are  in  no 
wav  treated;  and  that  the  civil  obedience  of  subjects  is  lett  pre- 
ciselv  as  and  where  it  was  before  the  Vatican  Council  was  con- 
vened 

(1)  However  I  will  first  examine  what  proofs  have  been  offered 
to  show  that- the  Vatican  Council  has  made  the  alleged  change; 
and  1  will  then  give  positive  evidence  to  show  what  the  Vatican 
Council  has  done.  From  these  things  it  will  be  seen  that  it  has 
neither  changed,  or  added  to,  nor  taken  away  any  thing  from  the 
doctrine  and  discipline  of  the  Church,  but  has  only  defined  what 
has  been  believed  and  practiced  from  the  beginning. 

The  arguments  to  prove  a  change  are  two: 

First,  Mr.  Gladstone  has  argued  from  the  third  chapter  ot  the 
Constitution  on  the  Roman  Pontiff,  that  his  powers  have  received 
a  great  extension.  Mr.  Gladstone,  so  far  as  I  am  aware,  is  the 
first  and  only  person  who  has  ever  ventured  on  this  statement. 

His  argument  is  as  follows:  ,, .   .    j     i„« 

He  dwells  with  no  little  amplification  upon  the     mtroductioii 
of  the  remarkable  phrase,"  "  ad  disciplinam  et  regimen  Ecclesiae, 
into  the  third  chapter ;  that  is,  "  non  solum  in  rebus  quae  ad  Mem 
et  mores  pertinent,  sed  etiam  in  iis  quae  ad  disciplinam  et  regimen 


132 


MBANmO  AHB  EFFBOT  Ot 


TUB  VATICAN  DECREES. 


133 


ficclesifls  fer  totiim  orbem  diiiieii»  pertinent"  He  sayp,  "  Abso- 
liito  obidienoe,  il  10  boldl;^  declarea,  is  due  to  the  Pope,  at  the 
peril  of  salvation,  nol  only  in  faith  and  in  morals,  but  in  all  thin;;s 
which  concern  the  discipline  and  government  of  the  Church  "  (p. 
41).  Submission  in  failh  and  morals  is  "abject"  enough,  but 
••  in  discipline  and  government"  too,  is  intolerable.  ''  Why  did 
the  astute  contrivers  of  this  tangled  scheme,"  etc.  ...  (p.  39). 
"The  work  is  now  truly  complete"  (p.  40).  This  he  calls  "the 
new  itwion  of  the  printiples  of  the  Papal  Church."  When  I 
litid  this,  I  asked,  "  Is  it  possible  that  Mr.  Gladstone  should  think 
tbis  to  be  any  thing  new?  What  does  he  conceive  the  Primacy 
of  Borne  to  mean  ?  With  what  eyes  has  he  read  history  ?  Can 
he  have  read  the  tradition  of  the  Catholic  Church?  As  one  of 
*'  tho  Mtiite  contrivers,"  I  will  answer  that  these  words  were  in* 
irodiiMd  because  the  Pontiffs  and  Councils  of  the  Church  have 
alwavB  so  used  them.  They  may  be  "remarkable"  and  "new" 
to  Mr.  Gladstone,  but  they  are  old  as  the  Catholic  Church.  I 
give  the  first  proofs  which  come  to  hand : 

MIcholas  I.,  in  the  year  863,  in  a  Council  at  Rome,  enacted: 
'*Si  quis  dogmata,  mandata,  interdicts,  sanctiones  vel  decretii  pro 
Catholica  fide,  pro  ecclesiasticadisciplina,  pro  correctione  fidclium, 
pro  emendatione  sceIeratorum«  vel  interdictione  immincntium  vel 
futuroruni  malorum,  a  Sedis  Apostolicss  Praeside  salubriter  pro- 
muteatii  contempserit :  Anathema  sit."  ♦  This  was  an  "  iron  grip  *' 
not  less  "  formidable"  than  the  third  chapter  of  the  Vatican  Con- 
:etitiition. 

It  may  be  said,  perhaps,  that  this  was  only  a  Pontiff  in  his  own 
atnse ;  or  only  a  Roman  Council. 

But  this  Canon  was  recognized  in  the  Eighth  General  Council 
held  at  Constantinople  in  869.  f 

Innocent  III.  may  be  no  authority  with  Mr.  Gladstone ;  but  he 
says,  what  every  Pontiff  before  him  and  after  him  has  said,  "  Nos 
qui  sumus  ad  regimm  Universalis  Ecclesise,  superna  dispositione 
▼ocati."t 

Ag^in.Sixtu8  IV.,  in  1471.  writes:  "Ad  Universalis  BcdesiaB 
refimeii  divina  disponente  dementia  vocatis,"§  ete. 

If  this  be  not  enough,  we  have  the  Council  of  Florence,  in 
1442,  defining  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  that  "  Ipsi  in  Beato  Petro 
pascendi,  regendi  a©  ffubernandi  Universalem  Ecclesiam  a'  Do- 
Biino  nostro  Jesu  Christo  plenam  potestam  traditam  es8e."|| 

Finally  Uie  Council  of  Trent  says : — "  Unde  mcrito  Pontifices 
Mazimi  pro  Suprema  potestato  sibi  in  Ecclesia  universa  tra- 
dita."f  etc. 

I  refrain  from  <]^uoting  Canonists  and  Theologians  who  use  this 
as  to  regimen  and  discipline.    It  needed  no  astutenesi 


♦Labbe,  (hndl  torn.  x.  p.  238,  ed.  Ven.  1730. 

t  Ibid.  torn.  x.  p.  633.    See  Fefri  Primiefftum^  2d  ]>art,  p.  81. 

:  Corpus  Juris  Canon.  Decret.  Greg.  lib.  ii.  cap.  xili.  Novit. 

'Corpus  Juris  Canon.  Extmm.  Cotmth*  lib.  i.  tit.  ix.  cap.  i. 

Labbe,  OmcU,  torn,  xviii.  p.  527,  ed.  Ven.  1732. 

'Seas.  xiv.  cap.  vii. 


to  transcribe  the  well-known  traditional  language  of  the  Catholic 
Church  It  is  as  universal  in  our  law  books  as  the  forms  of  the 
Courts  at  Westminster.  The  Vatican  Council  has  left  the  au- 
thority of  the  Pontiff  precisely  where  it  found  it.  Ihe  whole, 
therefore,  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  argument  faUs  with  the  misappre- 
hension on  which  it  was  based.  .,  o    titu  *  •   * 

What,  then,  is  there  new  in  the  Vatican  Council?  What  is  to 
be  thought  of  the  rhetorical  description  of  "Merovingian  mon- 
archs  and  Cariovingian  mayors,"  but  that  the  distinguished  au- 
thor is  out  of  his  depth  ?  The  Pop  had  at  all  times  the  power 
to  rule  the  whole  Church  not  onlv  in  faith  and  morals,  but  «^8o  in 
all  things  which  pertain  to  discipline  and  government,  and  that 

whether  infallibly  or  not.  ,     ,      »r    m  j  x         i.^ 

Such  is  literally  the  only  attempt  made  by  Mr.  Gladstone  to 
justify  his  assertions.  But  what  has  this  to  do  with  Civd  Alle- 
eiance?  There  is  not  a  syllable  on  the  subject,  there  is  not  a 
proposition  which  can  be  twisted  or  tortured  into  such  a  mean- 
ine  The  government  of  the  Church,  as  here  spoken  of,  is 
Durely  and  strictly  the  Spiritual  government  of  souls,  both  pash 
tors  and  people,  as  it  was  exercised  in  the  first  three  hundred 
years  before  any  Christian  State  existed.  .  ^r,    n-  -i 

But  next,  if  the  Vatican  Council  has  not  spoken  of  the  CivU 
Powers,  nevertheless  it  has  defined  that  the  Pope,  speakin^r  ex 
cathedra,  is  infallible:  this  definition,  by  retrospective  action, 
makes  all  Pontifical  acts  infallible,  the  Bull  Unam  Sanciam  in- 
cluded ;  and,  by  prospective  action,  will  make  all  similar  acts 
in  future  binding  upon  the  conscience.  , 

Certainly  this  is  true.  But  what  is  there  new  m  ^iis?^  The 
Vatican  Council  did  not  make  the  Pope  infallible.  Was  he  not 
infallible  before  the  Council?  He  is,  therefore,  not  more  infal- 
lible after  it  than  before.  If  a  handful  of  writers,  here  and  there 
denied  his  infallibility,  the  whole  Church  affirmed  it  Proof  of 
this  shall  be  given  in  its  place.  For  the  present,  I  affirm  that  all 
acts  ex  cathedra  such  as  the  Bull  Unam  Sanctam,  the  Bull  Urn- 
qenitus,  the  Bull  Auctorem  Fidei,  and  the  hke,  were  held  to  be 
infallible  as  fully  before  the  Vatican  Council  as  now. 

To  this  it  will  be  said,  "Be  it  so;  but  nobody  was  bound  under 
Anathema  to  believe  them."  I  answer  that  it  is  not  the  Ana 
thema  that  generates  faith.  The  infallibility  of  the  Head  of  the 
Church  was  a  doctrine  of  Divine  Faith  before  it  was  defined  m 
1870,  and  to  deny  it  wa«  held  by  grave  authorities  to  be  at  least 
proximate  to  heresy,  if  not  actually  heretical.*  The  Vatican 
Council  has  put  this  beyond  question;  but  it  was  never  lawtui 
to  Catholics  to  deny  the  infallibility  of  a  Pontifical  act  ex  cathe- 
dra. It  is  from  simple  want  of  knowledge  that  men  suppose 
every  doctrine  not  defined  to  be  an  open  question.  The  doctrine 
of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Church  has  never  been  defined  to  this 
da?  Will  any  man  pretend  that  this  is  an  open  question  among 
Catholics?  The  infaUibility  of  the  Pope  was  likewise  never  de- 
fined, but  it  was  never  an  open  question.     Even  the  Jausenists 

♦Ptetri  Privilegium^  part  i.  pp.  61-66,and  notes. 


U 


134 


JIEAMINO  AND  KFFl-Xrr  OP 


iid  not  venture  to  deny  it,  and  the  eviwion  of  some  of  them,  who 
gpiT©  "obeequious  silence"  instead  of  internal  assent  to  Pontifical 
nets,  was  condemned  by  Clement  XI.  The  definition  of  the  Vat- 
iean  Council  has  made  no  change  whatsoever  except  in  the  case 
of  those  who  denied  or  doubted  of  this  doctrine.  Wo  diflTerence, 
therefore,  whatsoever  has  been  made  in  the  state  of  those  who  be- 
lieved it  If  the  integrity  of  their  civil  allegiance  was  unim- 
peded befoie  1870,  it  is  unimpeded  now.  But  Mr.  Gladstone 
wliiiili  that  it  was  unimpeded  before.  His  contention  is  that  it  is 
imiieded  now.  But  this  is  self-contradictory,  for  they  believed 
the  same  doctrine  of  infallibility  both  then  and  now.  If  Mr.  Glad- 
stone means  that  the  Vatican  Council  has  made  a  difference  for 
the  few  who  denied  the  doctrine,  and  for  the  authors  of  Janus 
and  Quirmm,  and  the  professors  of  "  obsequious  silence,"  his 
contention  is  most  true.  But  then  he  must  change  his  whole  posi- 
tion. The  title  of  his  pamphlet  must  be  amended  and  stand, 
*'  The  Vatican  Decrees  in  their  Bearing  on  the  Civil  Allegiance 
of  those  who  before  1870  denied  the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope." 
But  this  would  ruin  his  case ;  for  he  would  have  admitted  the 
loyalty  of  Catholics  who  always  believed  it  before  the  definition 

was  mMe. 

We  aie  next  told  that  there  are  some  twelve  theories  of  what 
is  an  act  ex  cathedra.  We  have  been  also  told  that  there  are 
twenty.  But  how  is  it  that  Mr.  Gladstone  did  not  see  that  by  this 
the  whole  force  of  his  argument  is  shaken  ?  If  the  definition  has 
left  it  so  uncertain  what  acts  are,  and  what  acts  are  not,  ex  cath- 
edra, who  shall  hold  himself  bound  to  obedience?  Are  the 
eighty  condemnations  indicated  in  the  Syllabus  ex  cathedra  f 
By  this  showing  it  is  12  to  1  that  they  may  not  be.  It  is  an 
axiom  in  morals  **  Lex  dubia  turn  obligai.''  But  if  it  be  doubt- 
ful whether  the  Syllabus  is  ex  cathedra,  I  am  not  bound  to  re- 
ceive it  with  interior  assent  Again,  Mr.  Gkdstone  thinks  to  ag- 
gravate the  case  by  adding  that  the  Pope  is  to  be  the  ultimate 
judge  of  what  acts  are  ex  cathedra.  And  who  else  should  be  ? 
Ejus  est  inierpretari  cttjm  est  condere  is  a  principle  of  all  law. 
Mr.  Gladstone  has  been  acting  upon  it  all  his  life.  But,  perhaps 
it  may  be  said,  why  did  not  the  Council  put  beyond  doubt  what 
acts  are  ex  cathedra  f  Well  the  Council  nas  done  so,  as  I  hope 
to  show;  and  has  done  it  with  as  great  precision  as  the  subject 
matter  will  admit  It  has  given  fiye  tests,  or  conditions,  by  which 
an  act  ex  cathedra  may  be  distinguished. 

But  it  may  be  said  that  doubts  may  still  exist,  and  that  doubts 
may  still  be  raised  as  to  this  or  that  Pontifical  act  whether  it  be 
€X  cathedra  or  not  Surely  common  sense  would  say,  consult  the 
authority  which  made  the  law ;  the  legislator  is  always  at  hand, 
always  ready  to  explain  his  own  meaninfi^  and  to  define  the 
limits  of  his  intention.  If  there  be  any  thing  unreasonable  in 
this,  all  jurisprudence,  including  the  British  Constitution,  labors 
under  the  same  uncertainty,  or  rather  the  same  inevitable  imper- 
fection. 

I  am  surprised  that  Mr.  Gladstone  should  have  quoted  the 
■Mond  pragraph  of  the  chapter  in  the  Vatican  Constitution; 


THE  VATICAN   DBCREKS. 


135 


and  that  he  should  have  passed  over  the  fourth  paragraph,  in 
which  there  are  indeed  the  words  "  potestatis  saecularis  placito." 
This  is  the  only  recognition  of  secular  powers  in  the  whole  Con- 
stitution. In  that  paragraph  two  things  are  afiirmed:  the  one 
that  the  free  exercise  of  the  supreme  Spiritual  power  of  the 
Head  of  the  Christian  Church  may  neither  be  intercepted,  nor 
hindered,  nor  excluded  from  any  part  of  the  Church  by  any  hu- 
man authority ;  and,  secondly,  that  all  such  acts  of  his  Spiritual 
power  are  valid  and  complete  in  themselves,  and  need,  for  that 
end,  no  confirmation  or  placitttm  of  any  other  authority.  This 
independence  is  claimed  for  Christianity  by  every  one  who  be- 
lieves in  a  revelation.  Here  is  indeed  a  reference  to  Civil 
Powers ;  but,  lest  the  Vatican  Council  should  be  held  guilty  of  such 
innovations,  I  will  add  that  such  was  the  contention  of  St 
Thomas  of  Canterbury  against  Henry  II.  in  the  case  of  the  Con- 
stitutions of  Clarendon,  which  were  not "  cursed,"  as  Mr.  Glad- 
stone delicately  expresses  it  but  condemned  by' Alexander  III.  in 
the  year  1164.  This,  then,  has  not  changed  the  Civil  Allegiance 
of  Catholics  since  1870. 

But  I  am  not  undertaking  to  prove  a  negative.     I  hope  that  I 
have  shown  that  the  evidence  offered  to  prove  that  the  Council  has 
made  the  alleged  change  is  nil.     I  affirm,  then,  once  more  that 
the  Vatican  Council  has  not  touched  the  question  of  Civil  Alle- 
giance, that  it  has  not  by  a  jot  or  a  tittle  changed  the  relations 
in  which  the  Church  has  ever  stood  to  the   Civil  Powers;  and 
that,  therefore,  the  Civil  Allegiance  of  Catholics  is  as  full,  per^ 
feet  and  complete  since  the  Council  as  it  was  before.     These  are 
affirmations  capable  of  truth,  and  before  I  have  done  I  hope  to 
prove  them.     For  the  present   it  will    be    enough   to  give  the 
reason  why  the  Vatican  Council  did  not  touch  the  question  of 
the  relations  of  the  Church  to  the  Civil  Powers.     The  reason  is 
simple.     It  intended  not  to  touch  them,  until  it  could  treat  them 
fully  and  as  a  whole.     And  it  has  carefully  adhered  to  its  inten- 
tion.    I  will  also  give  the  reason  why  it  has  been  so  confidently 
asserted  that  the   Council  did  touch  the  Civil   Powers.    It  is 
because  certain  persons,  a  year  before  the  Council  met  resolved 
to  say  so.    They  wrote  the  book  Janus  to  prove  it;  they  published 
circulars  and  pamphlets  before  and  during  the  Council  to  re-as- 
sert it     They  first  prophesied  that  the  Council  would  interfere 
with  the  Civil  Powers,  and  now  they  write  scientific  history  to 
prove  that  it  has  done  so.     I  am  not  writing  at  random ;  I  care- 
fully collected  at  the  time  their  books,  pamphlets,  and  articles. 
1  read  them  punctually,  and  bound  them  up  into  volumes,  which 
are  now  before  me.     Mr.  Gladstone  has  reproduced  their  argu- 
ments.    But  for  this  systematic  agitation  before  the  Council,  no 
one,  I  am  convinced,  would  have  found  a  shadow  of  cause  for  it 
in  its  Decrees.     Now,  that   I  may  not   seem  to   write  this  as 
prompted  by  the  events  of  the  present  moment,  I  will  repeat 
what  I  published  in  the  year  1869,  before  the  Council  assembled, 
and  in  the  year  1870,  after  the  Council  was  suspended. 


136 


MEANING   AND  EFFECT  OF 


Befmm  llie  Council  mel  I  published  these  words :  *— 

"Whilst I  was  ^Titing  these  lines  a  document  has  appeared 
imrporting  to  be  the  answers  of  the  Theological  Faculty  of 
Munich  to  the  questions  of  the  Bavarian  Government. 

"The  questions  and  the  answers  are  so  evidently  concerted,  if 
not  written  by  the  same  hand,  and  the  animus  of  the  document 
BO  evidently  hostile  to  th©  Holy  8ee,  and  so  visibly  intended  to 
create  embarrassments  for  the  supreme  authority  of  the  Church, 
htA  in  respect  to  its  past  acts  and  also  in  respect  to  the  future 
action  of  the  Ecumenical  Council,  that  I  can  not  pass  it  over. 
But,  in  speaking  of  it,  I  am  comnelled,  for  the  first  time,  to  break 
silence  on  a  danger  which  has  tor  some  years  been  growing  in 
its  proportions,  and  I  fear  I  must  add,  in  its  attitude  of  menace. 
The  answers  of  the  University  of  Munich  are  visibly  intended  to 
excite  fear  and  alarm  in  th©  Civil  Powers  of  Europe,  and 
thereby  to  obstruct  the  action  of  the  Ecumenical  Council  if  it 
should  judge  it  to  be  opportune  to  define  the  infallibility  of  th© 
Pope.  The  answers  are  also  intended  to  create  an  impression 
that  the  theological  proofs  of  the  doctrine  are  inadequate,  and  its 
definition  beset  with  uncertainty  and  obscurity.  In  a  word,  the 
whole  correspondence  is  a  transparent  effort  to  obstruct  the  free- 
dom of  the  Ecumenical  Council  on  the  subject  of  the  Infalli- 
bility of  the  Pontiff;  or,  if  that  doctrine  be  defined,  to  instigate 
th©  Civil  Governments  to  assume  a  hostile  attitude  towards  the 
Holy  See.  And  this  comes  in  the  name  of  liberty,  and  from  those 
who  tell  us  that  the  Council  will  not  be  free. 

"I  shall  take  the  liberty,  without  further  word.^,  of  dismissing 
the  Bavarian  Govern ment*^from  our  thoughts.  But  I  must  declare, 
with  much  regret,  that  this  Munich  document  appears  to  me  to 
Iw  seditious. 

"  Facto  like  these  give  a  certain  warrant  to  the  assertion  and 
propheeies  of  politicians  and  Protestants.  They  prove  that  in 
the  Ckitholic  Church  there  is  a  school  at  variance  with  the  doc- 
trinal teaching  of  the  Holy  See  in  matters  which  are  not  of 
faith.  But  they  do  not  reveal  how  small  that  school  is.  Its 
center  would  seem  to  be  at  Munich.  It  has,  both  in  France  and 
Enghmd,  a  small  number  of  adherents.  They  are  active,  they 
correroond,  and  for  the  m'ost  part  write  anonymously.  It  would 
be  difficult  to  describe  its  tenets,  for  none  of  its  followers  seem  to 
he  agreed  in  all  points.  Some  hold  the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope, 
and  som©  defend  the  Temporal  Power.  Nothing  appears  to  be 
common  to  all,  except  an  nuimuM  of  opposition  to  the  acts  of  the 
Holy  See  in  matters  out»ide  the  faith. 

"In  this  country,  about  a  year  ago,  an  attempt  was  made  to 
render  impossible,  as  it  was  confidently  but  vainly  thought,  the 
definition  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Pontiff  by  revivinjj  the  mo- 
notonous controversy  about  Pope  Honorius.  Later,  we  were  told 
of  I  know  not  what  combination  of  exalted  personages  in  France 
for  th©  same  end.    It  is  certain  that  these  symptoms  are  not  spor- 

•**The  Ecumenical  Council  and  the  InfallibiHty  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff/*  Ptiri  iVi«%iii»i,  i»art  ii.  pp.  iai-5.    (Longiuans,  1871). 


THB  VATICAN   DECREES. 


137 


adic  and  disconnected,  but  in  mutual  understanding  and  with  a 
common  purpose.     The  anti-Catholic  press  has  eagerly  encou^ 
aged  this  school  of  thought.     If  a  Catholic  can  be  found  out  of 
tune  with  authority  by  half  a  note,  he  is  at  once  extolled  for  un- 
cqualed  learning  and  irrefragable  logic.     The  anti-Catholic  jour- 
nals are  at  his  service,  and  he  vents  his  opposition  to  the  com- 
mon opinions  of  the  Church  by  writing  against  them  anonymously. 
Sad  as  this  is,  it  is  not  formidable.    It  has  effect  almost  alone  upon 
those  who  are  not  Catholic.     Upon  Catholics  its  effect  is  hardly  ap- 
preciable ;  on  the  Theological  Schools  of  the  Church  it  will  have 
little  influence;  upon  the  Ecumenical  Council  it  can  have  none. 
•'  I  can  hardly  persuade  myself  to  believe  tliat  the  University  of 
Munich  does  not  know  that  the  relations  between  the  Pope,  even 
supposed  to  be  inftillible,  and  the  Civil  Powers  have  been  long 
since  precisely  defined  in  the  same  acts  which  defined  the  rela- 
tions between  the  Church,  known  to  be  infallible,  and  the  Civil 
Authority.     Twelve  Synods  or  Councils,  two  of  them  Ecumen- 
ical   have  long  ago  laid  down  these  relations  of   the  .Spiritual 
and  Civil  Powers.*    If  the  Pope  were  declared  to  be  infallible 
to-morrow,  it  would  in  no  way  affect  those  relations.  ^ 

••  We  may  be  sure     .     .     .     that  this  intellectual  disaffection, 
of  which,  in  these  last  days,  we  have  had  in  France  a  new  and 
mournful  example,  will  have  no  influence  upon  either  the  Ecu- 
menical CouncU  or  the  policy  of  the  Great  Powers  of  Europe. 
They  will  not  meddle  with  speculations  of  theological  or  histor- 
ical critics.     They  know  too  well  that  they  can  not  do  in  the 
nineteenth  century  what  was  done  in  the  sixteenth  and  the  sev- 
enteenth, t     n  1  ri         •!   'P 
*'  The  attempt  to  put  a  pressure  upon  the  General  i^ouncii,  it 
it  have  any  effect  upon  those  who  are  subject  to  certain  govern- 
ments, would  have  no  effect  but  to  rouse  a  just  indignation  in  the 
Episcopate  of  the  Church  throughout  the  world.    They  hold  their 
jurisdiction  from  a  higher  fountain,  and  they  recognize  no  supe- 
rior in  their  office  of  Judges  of  Doctrine,  save  only  the  Vicar  ot 
Jesus  Christ.     This  preliminary  meddling  has  already  awakened 
a  sense  of  profound  responsibility  and  an  inflexible  resolution  to 
allow  no  pressure  or  influence,  or  menace  or  intrigue,  to  cast  so 
much  as  a  shadow  across  their  fidelity  to  the  Divine  Head  of  the 
Church  and  to  his  Vicar  upon  earth.                       ^j     .,       .       j 
"  Moreover,  we  live  in  days  when  the  '  Kegium  Placitum    ana 
•Exequaturs'  and  *  Arrets'  of  Parliament  in  Spiritual  things  are 
simply  dead.     It  may  have  been  possible  to  hinder  the  promul- 
gation of  the  Council  of  Trent;    it  is   impossible  to  hinder  the 
promulgation  of  the  Council  of  the  Vatican.     The  verv  liberty 
of  which  men  are  proud  will  publish  it.     Ten  thousand  presses 
in  all  lands  will  promulgate  every  act  of  the  Church  and  of  the 
Pontiff,  in  the  face  of  all  Civil  Powers.     Once  published  these 
acts  enter  the  domain  of  faith  and  conscience,  and  no  human 
legislation,  no  civil  authority,  can  effiice  them.     The  two  hundred 
millions  of  Catholics  will  know  the  Decrees  of  the  Vatican  Ooun- 


«  Bellarm.  Opusctda  adv.  Barclaium,  p.  845,  ed.  Col.  161Y. 
12 


138 


MSANIHG  AND  EFFECT  Of 


eil ;  and  to  know  them  is  to  obey.  The  9?*^°SJ1  ^.l  ^^  ^^ 
civil  enforcement,  and  it  will  need  no  cml  aid.  The  Great  Fow- 
em  of  Europe  have  long  declared  that  the  conscience  of  men  la 
ftm  from  civil  constraint  They  will  not  stultify  their  own  dec- 
larations by  attempting  to  restnun  the  acts  of  the  Vatican  Coun- 
cil. The  jmardians  and  defenders  of  the  principles  of  1789  ought 
to  rise  as  one  man  against  all  who  should  so  violate  the  base  of 
the  political  society  in  France.^  What  attitude  lesser  Governments 
may  take  is  of  lesser  moment"  m  i.      j  «      i 

(2)  I  will  not  state  positively  what  the  Council  has  defined  on 
the  subject  of  the  Roman  Pontiff.  The  history,  then,  of  the  Defi- 
nition of  the  Infallibility  is  as  follows :-- 

L  Two  Schemata,  as  they  were  called,  or  treatises,  had  been 
prepared:  the  one  on  the  nature  of  the  Church;  the  other  on  its 
relations  to  the  Civil  State. 

The  first  alone  came  before  the  Council;  the  seconil  has  ncrer 
yet  been  so  much  as  discussed.   ^  ,     ^,       ^  .     _  .  „...,.. 

In  the  schema  on  the  nature  of  the  Church,  its  Infallibility  was 
tnsnted;  but  the  Infallibility  of  its  Head  was  not  so  much  as 
mentioned.  His  Primacv  and  authority  alone  were  treated.  In 
the  end,  the  chapter  relating  to  the  Primacy  and  authority  vvaa 
taken  out,  and  subdivided  into  four.  The  subject  of  the  Infalli- 
bility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  was  then  introduced.  .     - ^-^ 

The  reasons  for  this  change  of  order  were  given  in  1870,  as 

if '111  llHIBirH  * 

In  ail  theological  treatises,  excepting  indeed  one  or  two  of 
jrreat  authority,  it  htid  been  usual  to  treat  of  the  Body  of  the 
Church  before   treating  of  its  Head.    The  reason  of  this  would 
mppear  to  be  that  in  the  exposition  of  doctrine  the  logical  order 
wiis  the  more  obvious;  and  to  the  faithful,  in  the  first  formation 
of  the  Church,  the   Rody  of  the  Church  was  known  before  its 
Head.    We  might  have  expected  that  the  Council  would  have 
foiowcd  the  same  method.     It  is,  therefore,  all  the  more  remark- 
able that  the  Council  inverted  that  order,  and  defined  the  preroga- 
tive  of  the  Head  before  it  treated  of  the  constitution  and  endow- 
ments of  the  Body.     And  this,  which  was  brought  about  by  the 
pressure   (»f  special  events,  is   not  without  signihcance.      Ihe 
schools  of  the  Church  have  followed  the  logical  order;   but  the 
Church  in  Council,  when  for  the  first  time  it  began  to  treat  of 
its  own  constitution  and  authority,  changed  tlie  method    and 
like  the  Divine  Architect  of  the  Church,  began  in  the  histor- 
ical order,  with  the  foundation  and  Head  of  the  Church.    Our 
Diyine  Lord  first  chose  Cephas,  and  invested  him  with  the  pri- 
macv over  the  Apostles.    Upon  this  rock  all  were  built,  and  from 
him"  the  whole  unity  and  authority  of  the  Church  .t<K>k  its  rise. 
To  Peter  alone  first  was  given  the  plentitude  of  J""8diction  and 
of  infallible  authority.     Afterwards,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
was  shared  with  him  by  all  the  Apostles.    From  him  and  through 
him  therefore  all  began.     For  v^^iieh  cause  a  clear  and  precise 
conception  of  his  Primacy  and  privilege  is  necessary  to  a  clear 
and  precise  conception  of  the  Church.    Unless  it  be  first  distinctly 
•pprthended,  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  will  be  always  propor- 


THB  YATICAK   DECREES. 


130 


tionately  obscure.  The  doctrine  of  the  Church  does  not  detor- 
mine  the  doctrine  of  the  Primacy,  but  the  doctrine  of  the  Primacy 
does  precisely  determine  the  doctrine  of  the  Church.  In  be- 
ginning, therefore,  with  the  Head,  the  Council  has  followed  our 
Lord's  example,  both  in  teaching  and  in  fact;  and  in  this  will  be 
found  one  of  the  causes  of  the  singular  and  luminous  precision 
with  which  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  has,  in  one  brief  Constitu- 
tion, excluded  the  well-known  errors  on  the  Primacy  and  Infalli- 
bility of  the  Roman  Pontiff. 

The  reasons  which  prevailed  to  bring  about  this  change  of 
method  were  not  only  those  which  demonstrated  generally  the 
opportuneness  of  defining  the  doctrine,  but  those  also  which 
showed  specially  the  necessity  of  bringing  on  the  question  while 
as  yet  the  Council  was  in  the  fullness  of  its  numbers.  It  was 
obvious  that  the  length  of  time  consumed  in  the  discussion,  re- 
formation, and  voting  of  the  Schemata  was  such  that,  unless  the 
Constitution  De  Romano  Pontijice  were  brought  on  immediately 
after  Easter,  it  could  not  be  finished  before  the  setting  in  of 
summer  should  compel  the  bishops  to  disperse.  Once  dispersed, 
it  was  obvious  they  could  never  again  re-assemble  in  so  large  a 
number.  Many  who  with  great  earnestness  desired  to  share  the 
blessing  and  the  grace  of.  extinguishing  the  most  dangerous  error 
which  for  two  centuries  had  disturbed  and  harassed  the  faithful, 
would  have  been  compelled  to  go  back  to  their  distant  sees  and 
missions,  never  to  return.  It  was  obviously  of  the  first  moment 
that  such  a  question  should  be  discussed  and  decided,  not,  as  we 
should  have  been  told,  in  holes  and  corners,  or  by  a  handful  of 
bishops,  or  by  a  faction,  or  by  a  clique,  but  by  the  largest  possi- 
ble assembly  of  the  Catholic  Episcopate.  AH  other  Questions, 
on  which  little  divergence  of  opinion  existed,  might  well  be  left 
to  a  smaller  number  of  bishops ;  but  a  doctrine  vrhich  for  so 
long  had  vexed  both  pastors  and  people,  the  defining,  not  the 
truth,  of  which  was  contested  by  a  numerous  and  organized  op- 
position, needed  to  be  treated  and  aflSrmed  by  the  most  extensive 
deliberation  of  the  bishops  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Add  to  this 
the  many  perils  which  hung  over  the  continuance  of  the  Council, 
of  which  1  need  but  give  one  example.  The  outbreak  of  a  war 
might  have  rendered  the  definition  impossible.  And  in  fact 
the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  was  defined  on  the  eight- 
eenth of  July,  and  war  was  officially  declared  on  the  following 

day. 

With  these  an^  many  other  contingencies  fully  before  them, 
those  who  believed  that  the  definition  was,  not  only  opportune, 
but  necessary  for  the  unity  of  the  Church  and  of  the  Faith, 
urged  its  immediate  discussion.  Events  justified  their  foresight 
The  debate  was  prolonged  into  the  heats  of  July,  when,  by  mu- 
tual consent,  the  opposing  sides  withdrew  from  a  further  prolong- 
ing of  the  contest,  and  closed  the  discussion.  If  it  had  not  been 
already  protracted  beyond  all  limits  of  reasonable  debate—for 
not  less  than  a  hundred  fathers  in  the  general  and  special  dis- 
cussions had  spoken  chiefly,  if  not  alone,   of  Infallibility— it 


140 


■mUfWO  AKD  EFFECT  OF 


could  nol  80  have  ended.    Both  sidea  were  convinced  that  the 

matter  was  exhausted.*  ,      «     ^i    xi.  ^ 

2.  In  ortler  to  demonstrate,  if  poesible,  more  abundantly  that 
the  Vatican  Council  ba«  not  80  much  as  touched  the  relations  of 
the  Church  to  the  Civil  Power,  I  will  give  a  brief  analysis  of  its 
Beinltions  in  what  is  called  the  First  Dogmatic  Constitution  on 
tiie  Church  of  Christ 

It  is,  as  1  have  said,  a  portion  of  the  Schema  or  treatise  on 
iie  Church,  taken  out  and  enlarged  into  a  Constitution  by  iteelt 
Th«r©  would  have  been  only  one  Constitution  treating  of  both 
iie  Body  and  the  Head  of  the  Church.  Now  there  are  two. 
The  first,  treating  of  the  Head,  has  been  completed ;  the  second, 
treating  of  the  Body,  yet  remains. 

Now  of  the  First  Constitution  there  are  four  chapters. 

The  first  treats  of  the  Institution  of  the  Apostolic  Primacy  in 
Sunt  Peter.  The  sum  of  it  is  that  Our  Lord  appointed  Peter  to 
he  Head  of  the  whole  Church,  and  ^ve  him  immediately  a 
Primacy,  not  of  honor  only,  but  of  jurisdiction.  There  is  here 
not  a  word  of  any  thing  but  the  Pastoral  or  Spiritual  power. 

The  second  declares  the  Primacy  to  be  perpetual.  It  affirms 
two  things:  the  one  that  Peter  has  a  perpetual  line  of  succes- 
sors, and  that  the  Eoman  Pontiff  is  the  successor  of  Peter  m 

that  Primacy.  .         «  ,     ^  ^     ^-n.  x   i 

The  third  affirms  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  to  be 
full  and  supreme  in  all  things  of  faith  and  morals,  and  also  in 
discipline  and  government  of  the  Church;  and  that  this  jurisdic- 
tion is  ordinary  and  immediate  over  all  Churches  and  persons. 

The  fourth  chapter  treats  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Magu- 
lirtnin,  or  the  teaching  authority  of  the  Roman  Pontiff.  This 
chapter  affirms  that  a  Divine  assistance  was  given  to  Peter,  and 
in  Peter  to  his  successors  for  the  discharge  of  their  supreme 
office.  It  affirms  also  that  this  is  a  tradition  received  from  the 
beginning  of  the  Christian  Faith.  They,  therefore,  who  tell  us 
that  the  Vatican  Council  has  brou|;ht  in  a  new  doctrine  shovj 
that  they  do  not  know  what  the  \  atican  Council  has  said,  and 
what  it  IS  that  they  must  refute  before  their  charge  of  innovation 
oan  be  listened  to. 
Now  it  is  to  be  observed: 

1.  That  the  Council  declares  that  the  Roman  Pontiff,  speaking 
«r  mihedra,  has  a  Divine  assistance  which  preserves  him  from 

2.  That  he  speaks  ex  cathedra  when  he  speaks  under  these  five 
conditions:  (1)  as  Supreme  Teacher  (2)  tothe  whole  Church. 
(3)  Defining  a  doctrine  (4)  to  be  held  by  the  whole  Church  (5) 
in  faith  and  morals. 

If  disputants  and  controversialists  had  read  and  mastered 
ii«M  fiv®  conditions,  we  should  have  been  spared  much  senseless 
Ckmor.  ^  ^     . 

3.  Laatly,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  Council  has  not  defined 
the  limit  of  the  phrase  "faith  and  morals."    This  well-known 

*Fe^  Frwilegiumf  part  iii.  pp.  51-54. 


tfl 


THB  VATICAN  DECREES. 


141 


formuk  IS  plain  and  intelligible.  The  deposit  committed  to  the 
Church  is  the  Revelation  of  Divine  Truth,  and  of  the  Divine 
Law  The  Church  is  the  guardian  and  witness,  the  mterppeter 
and  the  expositor  of  the  Truth  and  of  the  Law  of  God.  Such 
is  the  meaning  of  "faith  and  morals."  It  is  a  formula  well 
known,  perfectly  clear,  sufficiently  precise  for  our  spiritual  and 
moral  life.  If  questions  may  be  raised  about  the  limits  ot  taith 
and  morals,  it  is  because  questions  may  be  raised  about  any 
thins;  and  questions  will  tilways  be  raised  by  those  who  love 
contention  against  the  Catholic  Church  more  than  they  love  eiAer 
faith  or  morals.  All  argument  against  the  Vatican  Council  as 
to  the  Umits  or  extent  of  this  formula  is  so  much  labor  lost.  It 
has  Aot  so  much  as  touched  the  extent  or  the  limits.  „     _    ,    . 

Such,  then,  is  the  whole  of  the  first  Constitution  De  EccUsia 
Christi.  It  does  not  contain  a  syllable  of  the  relation  of  this 
Primacy  to  the  Civil  or  Political  State,  except  to  say  that  no  hu- 
man authority  is  needed  for  the  validity  of  its  acts,  nor  may  any 
human  power  hinder  their  exercise.  But  these  are  truths  as  old 
as  the  day  when  St.  Petor  said  before  the  council  m  Jerusalem, 
"  If  it  be  just,  in  the  sight  of  God,  to  hear  you  rather  than  Uod, 
judge  ye.''  *  I  hope,  then,  I  have  justified  my  assertion  that  the 
Vatican  Council  has  not  changed  by  a  jot  or  a  tittle  the  civU  al- 
legiance of  Catholics.    It  is  m  free  and  perfect  now  as  it  was  be- 

^As  I  have  affirmed  that  the  doctrine  of  the  InfallibiliW  of  the 
Head  of  the  Church  was  a  doctrine  of  Divine  Faith  before  the 
Council,  and  that  the  denial  of  it  was  confined  to  a  small  school 
of  writers,  I  might  be  expected  here  to  offer  the  historical  proof 
of  this  assertion.  .«     n 

But  I  have  already  done  so  in  the  year  1869,  before  the  Coun- 
cil assembled.  I  would  therefore  refer  to  the  second  part  of 
"Petri  Privilegium " t  for,  as  I  believe,  a  sufficient  proof.  1 
will,  however,  in  a  few  words  give  the  outline  of  what  was  then 

It  is  acknowledged  by  the  adversaries  of  the  doctrine  that 
from  the  Council  of  ConsUnce  in  1414  to  this  day  the  doctrine 
has  been  the  predominant  belief  of  the  Church.  I  gave  evidence 
of  its  existence  from  the  Council  of  Constance  upwards  to  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon  in  445.  ,      ^  .t         •  •  j 

Next  I  traced  the  history  of  the  growth  of  the  opinions  ad- 
verse to  the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  from  the  Council 
of  Constance  to  the  year  1682,  when  it  was,  for  the  first  time,  re- 
duced to  formula  by  an  assembly  of  French  ecclesiastics  under 
the  influence  of  Louis  XIV. 

Lastly,  I  showed  how  this  formula  was  no  sooner  published 
than  it  was  condemned  in  every  Catholic  country  by  bishops 
and  universities,  and  by  the  Holy  See.  The  sum  of  the  evidence 
for  the  first  period  was  then  given  as  follows  :-- 

Gallicanism  is  no  more  than  a  transient  and  modern  opinion, 
which  arose  in  France,  without  warrant  or  antecedents  in  the 


♦Acts  iv.  19. 


fPartii.  pp.  63-107. 


i 


I? 


liia 


112 


MEAHINO  AKD  IFFIOT  OF 


THB  VATICAN  DECREES 


143 


ancient  theological  schools  of  the  French  Charch;  a  royal 
tlioologjr,  as  suddenly  developed  and  as  parenthetical  as  the 
lliirty-nine  Articlea,  affirmed  only  by  a  small  number  out  of  the 
numerous  Episcopate  of  France,  indignantly  rejected  by  many 
of  them ;  condemned  in  succession  by  three  Pontiffs ;  declared 
by  the  Universities  of  Louvain  and  iJouai  to  be  erroneous;  re- 
tracted by  the  bishops  of  France ;  condemned  by  Spain,  Hun- 
O,  and  other  countries ;  and  condemned  over  again  in  the 
AMctm-em  Mdei, 
From  this  evidence  it  is  certain : — 

1.  That  Gallicanism  has  no  warrant  in  the  doctrinal  practice 
or  tradition  of  the  Church,  either  in  France  or  at  large,  in  the 
thousand  years  preceding  the  Council  of  Constance. 

2.  That  the  first  traces  of  Gallicanism  are  to  be  found  about  the 
time  of  that  Council. 

3.  That  after  tlie  Council  of  Constance  they  were  rapidly  and 
•hiost  altogether  effaced  from  the  theology  of  the  Church  in 
France,  until  their  revival  in  1682. 

4.  That  the  Articles  of  1682  were  conceived  by  Jansenists,  and 
DUrried  through  by  political  and  oppressive  means  contrary  to 
the  sense  of  the  Church  in  France. 

5.  That  ttie  theological  faculties  of  the  Sorbonne,  and  of  France 
generally,  nobly  resisted  and  refused  to  teach  them.* 

But  Gallicanism  was  the  only  formal  interruption  of  the  uni- 
yeital  belief  of  the  Church  in  tne  Infallibility  of  its  Head.  The 
Vatican  Council  extinguished  this  modern  error. 

M.  Bmvlng  thus  far  offered  proof  of  the  first  proposition  in  my 
first  letter,  I  will  now  go  on  to  the  second. 

I  there  affirmed  that  the  Civil  Allegiance  of  Catholics  is  as  un- 
divided as  that  of  all  Christians,  and  of  all  men  who  recognize  • 
divine  or  natural  moral  law. 

Mr.   Gladstone  requires   of  us   "solid   and   undivided  alle- 

gianee.  f 

I  must  confess  to  some  surprise  at  this  demand.  The  allegiance 
of  every  moral  being  is  "  divided,"  that  is,  twofold ;  not,  indeed, 
in  the  same  matter  nor  on  the  same  plane,  but  in  two  spheres,  and 
on  a  higher  and  a  lower  level,  so  that  no  collision  is  possible, 
except  by  some  deviation  or  excess.  Every  moral  being  is  under 
two  authorities — human  and  divine.  The  child  is  under  the  au- 
thority of  parents,  and  the  authority  of  God;  the  subject  is  under 
the  authority  of  the  Civil  State,  and  the  Divine  authority  of  nat- 
ural or  revealed  religion.  Unless  we  claim  Infallibility  for  the 
State,  its  acts  must  be  liable  to  revision,  and  to  resistance  by  nat- 
ural conscience.  An  unlimited  obedience  to  parents  or  to  States 
would  generate  a  race  of  unlimited  monsters.  Surely  these  are 
Inilfima.  Our  Lord  Himself  taught  this  division  when  He  said, 
!'ll«iiier  therefore  to  Caesar  the  things  that  are  CsDsar's,  and  to 
God  the  things  that  are  God's."  Hut  this  all  men  admit  when 
they  tihink  Unfortunately,  when  they  attack  the  Catholic  Church 
or  the  Tatican  Council  they  seldom  think  much. 


•i»«tr*  Prrnkgrnm^  part  li.  p*  56. 


Jt  ■     '^nkm 


Put  the  objection  in  this  form :  "  We  non-Catholics  acknowl- 
edge two  authorities  as  you  Catholics  do.  Our  allegiance  to  the 
civil  law  is  revised  and  checked  by  our  consciences,  guided  by 
the  light  of  nature  and  by  the  li^ht  of  revelation.  We  refuse  to 
receive  religious  doctrine  or  discipline  from  the  State.  We  allow 
the  Society  of  Friends,  for  conscience'  sake,  to  refuse  to  take  an 
oath  of  allegiance,  and  even  to  fight  for  their  country,  for  con- 
science' sake;  and  yet  these  two  are  among  the  natural  duties  of 
subjects  which  the  civil  authority  may  most  justly  both  require 
and  enforce.  We  therefore  leave  every  man  free  to  refuse  obe- 
dience to  civil  laws  if  his  conscience  so  demands  of  him.  But 
you  Catholics  put  your  conscience  into  the  hands  of  the  Pope. 
You  are  bound  to  follow  his  interpretation  of  the  civil  law ;  and 
he  tells  you  when  your  conscience  ou^ht  to  refuse  obedience 
whether  you  see  it  or  not;  worse  than  this,  the  Pope  may  wrongly 
interpret  our  civil  laws,  or  he  may  even  so  interpret  them  as  to 
serve  his  own  interests ;  and  then  your  moral  and  mental  free- 
dom is  at  the  mercy  of  another.  You  must  choose  between  your 
religion  and  your  country."  I  think  I  have  not  understated  the 
argument  of  our  adversaries. 

To  this  the  answer  is  twofold:  First,  that  the  non-Catholic 
doctrine  is  more  dangerous  to  the  Civil  State  than  the  Catholi.c. 
If  any  individual  conscience  may  dispense  itself  from  civil  obe- 
dience, then  almost  all  men  will  obey  only  "  for  wrath"  and  not 
for  "conscience'  sake."*  And  such,  in  fact,  is  the  condition  of 
millions  of  men.  I  could  wish  that  the  mental  state  of  the  masses 
were  better  known.  I  wish  it  were  possible  to  ascertain,  by  let- 
ting down  a  thermometer  into  the  deep  sea  of  our  population, 
what  notions  remain  of  loyalty  or  allegiance.  No  doubt,  in  an 
insular  population  like  ours,  the  traditional  custom  of  enert  con- 
formity with  law  maintains  a  passive  compliance  which  passes 
for  Civil  Allegiance.  But  take  the  population  of  countries  where 
the  so-called  rights  of  the  political  conscience  of  individuals  have 
had  their  legitimate  development.  A  law  is  a  law  so  far  as  it  is 
accepted ;  a  man  is  bound  by  the  law  so  far  as  he  had  a  hand  in 
making  it  If  you  once  admit  that  the  ultimate  decision  as  to  civil 
obedience  is  in  the  individual,  each  political  conscience  is  a  law- 
giver and  a  law  to  itself  You  can  not  fly  principles  with  a  string 
as  boys  fly  kites.  Once  enunciated  they  have  nothing  to  control 
them.  If  every  man  has  the  ultimate  right  of  refusing  obedience 
to  the  law  upon  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience,  then  we  are 
in  a  state  ofunlimited  license,  which  is  potentially  a  state  of  un- 
limited revolution.  And  such,  in  truth,  since  1789  has  been  the 
state  of  the  west  of  Europe.  It  is  in  a  state  of  chronic  instability 
and  continuous  change.  More  than  forty  revolutions  have  sprung 
from  this  essential  lawlessness. 

Secondly,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  Church,  the 
rights  of  individual  conscience  are  secured  not  only  against  ex- 
ternal coercion,  bu*  against  its  own  aberrations.  The  obedience 
of  .Catholic  subjects  to  their  Civil  Kulers  is  a  positive  precept  of 

*Roni.  xiii.  6. 


t 


TBfl  VATICAN  DBCRBE8. 


145 


Alt™ 


li'EASlKO  A3fl>  EFFICT  OF 


religion.  The  rising  against  legitimate  authority  is  forbidden  ns  the 
■in  of  rebellion.    The  Syllabus  has  condemned  the  propositions  :-- 

"Authority  is  nothing  else  but  the  result  of  numencal  superi- 
ority and  material  force."— Prop.  60.     ^    ,    .  .      .    _  .  , 

"It  is  allowable  to  refuse  obedience  to  legitimate  Fnnees,  ana 
ftlso  to  rebel  against  them." — Prop.  63.  ,  -.  ^    ^i     -  j.  •  j     i 

The  political  conscience  of  Catholics  is  not  left  to  the  individual 
judgment  alone.  It  is  guided  by  the  whole  Christian  morality, 
by  the  greatest  system  of  ethical  legisktion  the  world  bmeyer 
mm,  the  Canon  Law  and  the  Moral  Theology  of  the  Cathoic 


Church     Not  only  all  capricious  and  willful  resistances  ol  tlie 
Civil  Law,  but  all  unreasonable  and  contentious  disobedience  is 
condemned  by  its  authority.    It  is  a  doctrine  of  faith  that  legiti- 
mate uovereignty  exists  not  only  in  the  unity  of  the  l.hurch,  but 
o«tBide  of  the  same ;  and  not  only  amon^  Christian  nations,  but 
mlso  among  the  nations  that  are  not  Christian.*    Moreover,  that 
to  all  such  legitimate  sovereips  subjects  are  bound  by  the  Divine 
Lawf  to  render  obedience  in  all  lawful  thinm.    It  is  certain, 
therefore,  that  Catholics  are  bound  U)  Civil  Allegiance  b;jr  every 
bond,  natural  and  supernatural,  as  absolutely  as  their  non-Lathoiic 
fellow-countrymen;   and,  1   must  add     more    explicitly.      And 
farther  that  they  can  hardly  be  reduced  to  the  necessity  oi  using 
their  private  judgment  as  to  the  lawfulness  of  obeying  anv  law. 
In  all  matters  of  ordinary  civil  and  political  life,  the  duty  of  Cath- 
olics is  already  defined  by  a  whole  code  which  enforces  obedience 
for  conscience'  sake.    In  the  rare  case  of  doubt  which  may  arise 
in  times  of  religious  persecution,  political  revolution,  civil  wars, 
or  wars  of  succession,  Catholic  and   non-Catholic  subjects  are 
iHke   in   this,— they  are  both   compelled  to  choose  their  side. 
Hot  the  non-Cathohc  subject  has  hardly  law  or  judjre  to  aid  his 
conscience :  the  Catholic  has  both.     He  has  the  whole  traditional 
moral  law  of  Christendom,  which  has  formed  and  perpetuated  the 
eif  il  and  political  order  of  the  modern  world,  and  he  has  a  multi- 
iado  of  principles,  maxims,  and  precedents  on  which  to  lorm  his 
mm  Judgment,    Finally,  if  he  be  unable  so  to  do.  he  can  seek  for 
miiibnce  from  an  authority  which  the  whole  Christian  world 
onee  believed  to  be  the  highest  judicial  tribuna   and  the  source 
of  it»  civil  order  and  stabihty.     And  is  this  to  place    his  mental 
and  moral  freedom  at  the  mercy  of  another?      As  much  as  and 
mo  more  than  we  place  ourselves  "at  the  mercy    of  the  Christian 
Church  for  our  salvation.    Let  us  take  an  example :   It  is  certain, 
by  the  natural  and  Divine  Law,  that  every  man  may  defend  himself, 
and  that  every  people  has  the  right  of  self-defense.    On  this  all 
defensive  wara  are  justifiable.    But  if  the  Sovereign  levy  war 
upon  his  people,  have  they  the  right  of  self-dtfense?    Beyond  all 
doubt    But  at  what  point  may  they  take  up  arms?  and  what 
amount  of  oppression  justifies  recourse  to  resistance  7    *  or  the 
non^Jotholics  there  can  only  be  these  answers :    1' **,® /"'"f  ^^P 
the  light  of  his  own  conscience,  or  he  must  be  guided  by  thejudjj- 
ment  of  the  greater  number,  or  by  the  wiser  heads  of  his  nation. 

•Horn.  xiii.  1-4.  t  St.  Peter  li  13-15. 


But  the  greater  number  may  not  be  the  wiser;  and  to  judge  who 
are  the  wiser  throws  the  judgment  once  more  upon  himself.  The 
Catholic  subject  would  use  his  own  judgment,  and  the  judgment 
of  his  countrymen,  but  he  would  not  hold  himself  at  liberty  to 
take  up  arms  unless  the  Christian  law  confirmed  the  justice  of 
his  judgment.  But  from  whom  is  this  judgment  to  be  sought? 
He  would  ask  it  of  all  those  of  whom  he  asks  council  for  the  sal- 
vation of  his  soul.  If  this  is  to  be  at  the.  mercy  of  another,  we 
are  all  at  the  mercy  of  those  whom  we  believe  to  be  wiser  than 

Let  US  take  an  example:  The  Italian  neople  have  been  for 
twenty  years  spectators  of  a  revolution  which  has  overthrown  the 
Sovereigns  of  Naples  and  Tuscany.  I  will  ask  two  questions : 
First,  would  any  Italian  place  himself  at  the  mercy  of  another,  if 
he  should  ask  of  the  head  of  his  religion  what  course  as  a  Chrig- 
tian  he  ought  to  pursue?  «,    «       .  ia 

And,  secondly,  what  has  been  the  action  of  the  Pope  m  respect  to 
the  Italian  revolution  ?  He  has  said  that  to  coK)perate  in  the  Italian 
revolution  is  not  lawful.  Surely,  if  Italians  are  free  to  form  their 
conscience  on  the  doctrines  of  the  revolution,  they  are  equally 
free  to  form  their  conscience  on  the  doctrines  of  their  religwn. 
To  deny  this  is  to  have  two  weights  and  two  measures.  The 
non-Catholic  theory  tells  us  that  the  conscience  of  subjects  is  the 
ultimate  test.  Be  it  so ;  my  conscience  tells  me  that  it  is  right 
to  obey  mv  religion  rather  than  the  revolution.  If  this  be  a  di- 
vided allegiance,  then  it  is  Christianity  which  has  introduced  it, 
and  not  the  Church.  It  was  Our  Lord  himself  who,  by  mstitu^ 
ing  His  Church,  separated  for  ever  the  two  powers.  Civil  and 
Spiritual,  thereby  redeeming  the  conscience  and  the  religion  of 
men  from  the  dominion  of  princes^  and  conferring  upon  the  Cml 
Power  the  consecration  by  which  it  is  confirmed,  and  the  higher 
law  by  which  its  sphere  is  defined.  It  is  all  this,  and  not*  "our 
old  friend  the  deposing  power  alone,"  which  I  have  described  as 
teaching  obedience  to  subjects  and  moderation  to  princes.t  1; 
all  conflicts  between  the  (!jivil  and  Spiritual,  the  consciences  of 
Christians  will  be  decided  by  the  Christian  law. 

I  conclude,  therefore,  this  part  of  the  subject  by  re-assertmg: 

1.  That  the  relations  of  the  Church  to  the  State  were  never  so 
much  as  proposed  for  discussion  in  the  Vatican  Council. 

2.  That  in  its  Constitutions  or  Definitions  it  has  m  no  way 

touched  the  subject.  ,.  j    %      ^       »     r 

3  That  the  Definitions  of  the  Council  are  declaratory  of 
doctrine  already  of  Divine  Faith,  and  that  no  new  "  enactment 

whatsoever  was  made.  ,     «.  .,  r»  i  ft. 

4  That  the  relations  of  the  Church  to  the  Civil  Power  were  left 
by  the  Vatican  Council  as  thej  were  known  and  declared  by  the 
C\)uncil  of  Trent  and  all  previous  Councils.       ^        , 

I  will  therefore  answer  Mr.  Gladstone's  questions  in  page  44  of 
his  "  Expostulation."    He  tells  us  that  "  what  is  not  wanted  is 

* ExMuiuiaHont  p.  52.  ^.  .«  j  «i    loco 

fl^mpmd  F&wer  of  the  Pope,  pp.  44-46,  second  ed.  186,2. 

13 


1. 


]l§ 


spmrrrAL  axb  citil  fowbbs. 


taime  and  general  aggertion  of  whatever  kind,  and  howsoever  siiH 
mm.  What  is  wanted,  and  that  in  the  most  8j>eoific  form  and  in 
the  clearest  terms,  I  take  to  be  one  of  two  things,  that  is  to  say, 

wtoeF""" 

"  1.  A  demonstration  that  neither  in  the  name  of  faith,  nor  in 
the  name  of  morals,  nor  in  the  name  of  the  government  or  discip- 
Wm  of  the  Church,  is  the  Pope  of  Rome  able,  by  virtue  of  the 
powers  asserted  for  him  by  the  Vatican  decree,  to  make  any 
claim  upon  tiiose  who  adhere  to  his  communion  of  snch  a  nature 
as  can  impair  the  inte^ity  of  their  Civil  Allegiance ;  or  else, 

**  Z  That  if,  and  when  such  ekim  is  made,  it  will  even,  al- 
thoogh  resting  on  the  definitions  of  the  Vatican,  be  repelled  and 
Miiectcd  "^ 

1  have  shown  that  the  Pope  is  not  able,  by  the  Vatican  Council, 
to  make  any  claim  in  the  name  of  faith,  nor  in  the  name  of  mor- 
als, nor  in  the  name  of  the  government  or  discipline  of  the  Church, 
which  he  was  not  able  to  make  before^  the  Vatican  Council  ex- 
isted. 

To  Mr.  Gladstone's  first  question,  therefore,  I  answer,  that 
neither  in  virtue  of  the  Vatican  Decrees,  nor  of  any  other  de- 
erees,  nor  of  his  supreme  authority  as  Head  of  the  Christian 
CSmrch,  can  the  Pope  make  any  claim  uj)on  those  who  adhere  to 
hia  eommnnion  of  such  a  nature  as  can  impair  the  integrity  of 
their  Civil  Allegiance. 

To  his  second  question,  therefore,  the  answer  is  already  given. 
I  have  no  need  to  declare  myself  ready  to  repel  and  reject  that 
wiich  the  Pope  can  not  do.  He  can  not  do  an  act  contrary  to 
the  Divine  Ijaw;  but  to  impair  my  Civil  Allegiance  would  be  con- 
trary to  the  Law  of  G»>d. 

It  is  strange  to  me  that  so  acute  a  reasoner  should  have  begged 
the  question,  which  is  this :  By  whom  are  the  limits  of  Civil  Al- 
legiance to  be  determined?  If  Mr.  Gladstone  should  say  by  the 
Btate,  I  would  ask :  Does  Me  mean  that  the  State  is  infallible  in 
morals?  or  that  subjects  have  no  conscience,  or  that  the  State  may 
coerce  their  conscience,  or  that  the  State  can  create  a  morality 
which  all  consciences  must  obey?  Some  of  these  postulates  are 
inevitably  assumed  in  his  question,  if  it  has  any^  meaning. 

My  reasons  for  saying  this  will  be  seen  in  the  following 
Dhapter. 

II.  Thb  Rblatioks  of  the  Spiritual  and  Civil  Powers. 

We  will  now  go  on  to  my  second  proposition,  that  the  relations 
of  the  Catholic  Church  to  the  Civil  Powers  have  been  fixed  im- 
mutably from  the  beginning,  because  they  arise  out  of  the  Divine 
constitution  of  the  Church  and  out  of  the  Civil  Society  of  the 

natural  order.  .      , ,   i. 

I.  Inasmuch  as  the  natural  and  civil  society  existed  before  the 
foundation  of  the  Christian  Church,  we  will  begin  with  it;  and 


♦  The  Vatican  J^eowJ,  p.  ^. 


SPIRITUAL  AND  CIVIL  POWERS. 


147 


here  my  concessions,  or  rather  my  assertions,  will,  I  hope,  satisfy 
all  but  Caesarists. 

1.  The  civil  society  of  men  has  God  for  its  Founder.  It  was 
created  potentially  in  the  creation  of  man ;  and  from  him  has 
been  unfolded  into  actual  existence.  The  human  family  con- 
tains the  first  principles  and  laws  of  authority,  obedience,  and 
order.  These  three  conditions  of  society  are  of  Divine  origin ; 
and  they  are  the  constructive  laws  of  all  civil  or  political  society. 

2.  To  the  Civil  Society  of  mankind  supreme  authority  is  given 
immediately  by  God ;  for  a  society  does  not  signify  mere  number, 
but  number  organized  by  the  laws  and  principles  which  its  Divine 
Founder  implanted  in  the  human  family.  Sovereignty,  therefore, 
is  given  by  God  immediately  to  human  society ;  and  mediately,  or 
wudiante  soeietate,  to  the  person  or  persons  to  whom  society  may 
commit  its  custody  and  its  exercise.  When  once  the  supreme 
power  or  sovereignty  has  been  committed  by  any  society  to  a 
king,  or  to  consuls,  or  to  a  council,  as  the  case  may  be — for  God 
has  given  no  special  form  of  Civil  Government— though  it  be  not 
held  by  those  who  receive  it  by  any  Divine  right,  as  against  the 
society  which  gave  it,  nevertheless  it  has  both  a  Divine  sanction 
and  a  Divine  authority.  For  instance,  it  has  the  power^  of  life 
and  death.  God  alone  could  give  to  man  this  power  over  man. 
God  gave  it  to  man  for  self-defense.  It  passes  to  society  at  large, 
which  likewise  has  the  right  of  self-defense.  It  is  committed  by 
society  to  its  chief  executive.  But,  inasmuch  as  the  supreme 
power  is  still  given  by  God  to  the  Civil  Ruler,  even  though  it  be 
mediately,  it  has  a  Divine  sanction;  and  so  long  as  the  Civil  Ruler 
does  not  deviate  from  the  end  of  his  existence,  the  society  has  no 

Sower  to  revoke  its  act.  For  example :  the  Civil  Ruler  is  for  the 
efense  of  the  people;  but  if  he  should  make  war  upon  the  peo- 
ple, the  right  of  self-defense  would  justify  resistance.  I  ain  not 
now  engaged  in  saying  when  or  how;  but  the  right  is  undeniable. 
Manslaughter  is  not  murder,  if  it  be  in  self-defense;  wars  of  de- 
fense are  lawful ;  and  just  resistance  to  an  unjust  prince  is  not 
rebellion.  All  this  is  founded  upon  the  Divine  sanctions  of  the 
civil  and  political  society  of  man.  even  in  the  order  of  nature.  It 
has,  then,  God  for  its  Founder,  for  its  Legislator,  and  by  His 
divine  Providence  for  its  Supreme  Ruler.  , 

3.  The  laws  of  such  society  are  the  laws  of  nature,  it  is 
bound  by  the  natural  morality  written  on  the  conscience  and  on 
the  heart.  The  ethics  which  govern  men  become  politics  m  the 
government  of  States.  Politics  are  but  the  collective  morals  of 
society.  The  Civil  Ruler  or  Sovereign  is  bound  by  the  laws :  the 
subject  within  the  sphere  of  these  laws  owes  to  him  a  civil  aUc- 
ffiance.  The  Civil  Ruler  may  bind  aU  subjects  bv  an  oath  of  al- 
legiance.    He  may  call  on  all  to  bear  arms  for  the  safety  of  the 

4  The  State  has  for  its  end,  not  only  the  safety  of  person  and 
property,  but.  in  its  fullest  sense,  the  temporal  happiness  of  man. 
Within  the  sphere  of  natural  morality,  and  in  order  to  its  end, 
the  State  is  supreme :  and  its  power  is  from  God.  This  is  tn© 
meaning  of  St.  Paul's  words : — 


148 


BKLATIOXS  OF  THE 


.  **JM  evciT  wml  be  subject  to  bigber  powfere:  for  tbere  is  »o 
power  but  from  God ;  and  fchose  thai  are,  arc  ordained  of  God. 
TlieTefore  be  tbat  resisteth  the  power,  resistetb  the  ordinance 
of  God;  and  they  that  resist,  parobase  to  themselves  damna- 
tion. .  .  .  For  he  is  God's  minister  to  thee  for  good.  But 
if  thou  do  that  which  is  evil,  fear;  for  he  beareth  not  the  sword 
itt  lain :  for  be  is  God's  minister,  an  avenger  to  execote  wrath 
upon  him  that  doetb  evil.  Wherefore  be  subject  of  necessity, 
not  orabf  lor  wrath,  but  also  for  conscience'  sake."  *^ 
Hie  State,  then,  is  a  perfect  society,  supreme  within  its  own 

tere,  and  in  order  to  its  own  end :  but  as  that  end  is  not  the 
best  end  of  man,  so  the  State  is  not  the  highest  society  among 
men;  nor  is  it,  beyond  its  own  sphere  and  end,  supreme.  I  have 
drawn  this  out  in  greater  fullness  to  show  tbat  the  Church  is  in 
the  highest  degree  conservative  of  all  the  natural  authority  of 
nlors,  and  of  the  natural  allegiance  of  subjects.  It  is  mere 
ibaMowness  to  say  that  between  the  Civil  authority,  as  Divinely 
iwinded  in  nature,  and  the  spiritual  authority  of  the  Church  there 
wii  be  opposition. 

Now,  as  to  the  Divine  institution  of  the  Civil  Society  of  the 
world  and  of  its  independence  in  all  things  of  the  natural  order, 
what  I  have  alread?  said  is  enough.  The  laws  of  the  order 
of  nature  are  from  God.  So  lon|r  as  a  father  exercises  his  do- 
mestic authority  according  to  the  law  of  God,  no  other  authority 
Mu  Intervene  to  control  or  to  hinder  his  government.  So  like- 
wise of  the  Prince  or  Sovereign  power,  be  it  lodged  in  one  or  in 
maiiy.  There  is  no  authority  upon  earth  which  can  depose  a 
jiMitiiivereign  or  release  such  suojects  from  their  obedience.f 

H.  There  is,  however,  another  society,  the  end  of  whioh  is  the 
eternal  happiness  of  mankind.  This  also  has  God  for  its  Founder, 
and  that  immediately ;  and  it  has  received  from  God  its  form  and 
eonslilution,  and  its  rulers  receive  their  authority  immediately,  | 
with  a  special  Divine  sanction  and  authority,  from  God. 

Two  tnings  follow  at  once  from  this : — 

1.  That  the  society  which  has  for  its  end  the  eternal  happiness 
of  man  is  of  an  order  higher  than  the  society  which  aims  only  at 
the  natural  happiness  of  man. 

2.  That  as  tne  temporal  and  the  eternal  happiness  of  man  are 
both  ordered  by  Divine  laws,  these  two  societies  are,  of  necessity, 
in  essential  conformity  and  harmony  with  each  other.  Collision 
between  them  can  only  he  if  either  deviates  from  its  respective  laws. 

The  natural  society  of  man  aims  directly  at  the  temfjoral  hap- 
piness of  its  sul]jcct8,  but  indirectly  it  aims  also  at  their  eternal 
happiness :  the  supernatural  socie^  aims  directly  at  their  eter- 
nal iiappiness,  Mki  indirectly  at  their  temporal  happiness,  but  al- 
«i|s  in  so  far  only  as  their  temporal  happiness  is  oonducire  to 
their  eternal  end. 


*]tomaiis  xiii.  1-5. 

f  **Btiam  nocentiuni  potestas  non  est  nisi  a  Deo."— St  Augustine, 
Ik  JfulMm  Bom  contra  Mmnckf  cap.  xxxii. 
{  Suarez,  Defetmo  Fidei,  lib.  iii.  cap.  ii.  sect.  5. 15,  16. 


BpmrniAL  akd  civil  powers. 


149 


From  thii  again  two  other  corollaries  follow : — 

1.  That  the  nigher  or  supernatural  society  is  supreme  because 
it  has  no  other  society,  above  it  or  beyond  it,  with  an  end  higher 

than  its  own.  .        .,.,,.     ^ 

2.  That  the  office  of  the  supernatural  society  is  to  aid,  direct, 
and  perfect  the  natural  society ;  that  its  action  upon  it  is  always 
cedificadonem  non  in  destructionem,  inasmuch  as  it  is  governed 
by  the  same  Divine  Lawgiver,  and  it  is  directed  to  an  end  which 
inoludes  and  insures  the  end  of  the  natural  society  aisa 

To  put  this  briefly:  The  State  has  for  its  end  the  temporal 
happiness  of  its  subjects ;  the  Church  has  for  its  end  their  eter- 
nal happiness.  In  aiming  directly  at  temporal  happiness,  the 
State  aims  also  indirectly  at  the  eternal;  for  these  things  are 
promoted  by  the  same  laws.  In  aiming  at  eternal  happiness, 
the  Church  also  indirectly  aims  at  the  temporal  happiness  of 

III.  The  Divine  Founder  of  the  Christian  Church  said:  "To 
thee  I  will  give  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  And  what- 
soever thou  shalt  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  also  in  heaven; 
and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  also  in 
heaven."*  And  again:  "All  power  is  given  to  me^  in  heaven 
and  in  earth.  Going  therefore,  teach  all  nations,"  .  .  . 
•'  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have  com- 
manded you."  t  „  .V     /^.    .  ^• 

If  these  two  commissions  do  not  confer  upon  the  Christian 
Church  a  supreme  doctrinal  authority,  and  a  supreme  j«»cial 
office,  in  respect  to  the  moral  law,  over  all  nations,  and  over  all 
persons,  both  governors  and  governed,  1  know  not  what  words 
could  suffice  to  do  so. 

That  authority  and  that  office  are  directive  and  preceptive,  so 
long  as  Princes  and  their  laws  are  in  conformity  with  the  Chris- 
tian law;  and  judicial,  ratione  peccati,  by  reason  of  sin,  whenso- 
ever they  deviate  from  it.  «.         ,       t.  • 

If  any  man  deny  this,  he  would  thereby  affirm  that  Princes 
have  no  superior  upon  earth;  which  is  the  doctrine  of  the 
heathen  Caesarism.  ,  . 

But  no  man  will  say  that  Princes  have  no  superior.  It  is  un- 
meaning to  say  that  they  have  no  superior  but  the  law  of  God : 
for  that  is  to  play  with  words.  A  law  is  no  superior  without  an 
authority  to  judge  and  to  apply  it  , 

To  say  that  God  is  the  sole  Lawgiver  of  Princes  is  a  doctrine 
unknown,  not  only  to  the  Catholic  Church,  but  to  the  Constitu- 
tion of  England.  When  we  say,  as  our  old  Jurists  do,  Non  Rex 
faeii  legem,  but  Lex  facit  Begem,  we  mean  that  there  is  a  will 
above  the  King;  and  that  will  is  the  Civil  Society,  who  judges 
if  and  when  the  King  deviates  from  the  law.  But  this  doctrine, 
unless  it  be  tempered  by  vigorous  restraint,  is  chronic  revolution. 
What  adequate  restraint  is  there  but  in  a  Divine  authority 
higher  than  the  natural  society  of  man?  .  ,.  i- 

The  Supreme  Judicial  Power  of  the  Church  has  no  jurisdiction 


•St  Matthew  xn.  19. 


flbid.  xxviii.  18,19. 


150 


1EI.4TI0XS  OF  TBB 


over  those  that  are  not  Christian ;  and  the  entire  weight  of  its 
iiuthority,  if  it  were  applied  at  all  to  such  a  state,  would  be  ap- 
fliod  to  confirm  the  natural  rights  of  sovereignty  and  to  enforce 
me  natural  duty  of  allegiance :  and  that,  upon  the  principle  that 
the  supernatural  power  of  the  Church  is  for  edification,  not  for 
destruction;  that  is,  to  build  uj>  and  to  perfect  the  order  of  na- 
ture, not  to  pull  down  a  stone  m  the  symmetry  of  the  natural  so- 
ciety of  man.     St.  Thomas  says  : 

"Power  and  authority  are  established  by  hnman  right ;  the 
distinction  between  the  mithful  and  those  who  do  not  believe  is 
Mtablished  by  Divine  right  But  the  Difine  right,  which  comes 
by  grace,  does  not  destroy  the  human  right,  which  is  in  the 
oi^der  of  nature."  * 

Let  us  suppose  that  the  Sovereign  Power  of  a  heathen  people 
wet©  to  make  laws  contrary  to  the  law  of  God,  would  the  Church 
intervene  to  depose  such  a  sovereign  ?    Certainly  not»  on   the 

Srinciple  laid  down  by  the  Apostle,  **  What  have  I  to  do  to  judge 
lose  that  are  without  ?  '*  f 

Such  a  people  is  both  individually  and  socially  outside  the 
Divine  jurisdiction  of  the  Church.  The  Church  has,  therefore, 
in  this  respect,  no  commission  to  discharge  towards  it  except  to 
convert  it  to  Christianity. 

But  if  it  be  the  office  of  the  Church  to  teach  subjects  to  obey 
even  Heathen  Rulers,  as  the  Apostle  did,  how  much  more,  in 
i^Q^se  of  Christian  Princes  and  their  laws,  is  it  the  office  of 
tlAkiurch  to  confirm,  consecrate,  and  enforce  the  sanctions  of 
relkion  and  of  conscience,  of  doctrine  and  of  discipline,  the 
whole  code  of  natural  and  political  morality,  and  all  laws  that 
are  made  in  conformity  with  the  same. 

If  Christian  Princes  and  their  laws  deviate  from  the  law  of 
Ood,  the  Church  has  authority  from  God  to  judge  of  that  devia- 
tion, and  by  all  its  powers  to  enforce  the  correction  of  that  de- 
parture from  justice.  1  do  not  see  how  any  man  who  believes 
in  the  Revelation  of  Christianity  can  dispute  this  assertion;  and 
to  Bueh  alone  I  am  at  present  speaking. 

Mr.  Gladstone  has  quoted  a  paesa|;e  from  an  "Essny  on  Caesar- 
ism  and  Ultramontanism,"  in  which  1  have  claimed  for  the 
Church  a  supremacy  in  spiritual  things  over  the  State,  and  have 
made  this  statement : 

"Any  power  which  is  independent  and  can  alone  fix  the  limits 
of  its  own  jurisdiction,  and  can  thereby  fix  the  limits  of  all  other 
Jurisdictions,  is,  ipso  facio,  supreme.  But  the  Church  of  Jesus 
Christ,  within  the  sphere  of  revelation— of  faith  and  morals — is 
an  this,  or  is  nothing  or  worse  than  nothing,  an  imposture  and 
an  usurpation ;  that  is,  it  is  Christ  or  Antichrist."  X 

It  is  hardly  loyal  to  take  the  conclusion  of  a  syllogism  without 

e  premises.    In  the  very  pace  before  this  quotation  I  had 


the  premises. 

mid: 


*St.  Thomas,  2da  2dm,  qiuxsi.  x.  art.  10. 

II  Cor.  V.  12. 
€kn»rism  aiid  Ulimmtmimmm^  p.  3& 


SPIRITUAL  AXD  CIVIL  POWERS. 


151 


"In  any  question  as  to  the  competence  of  the  two  powers, 
either  thew  must  be  some  judge  to  decide  what  does  and  what 
does  not  fall  within  their  respective  spheres  or  tJiey  are  de- 
Uvered  over  to  perpetual  doubt  and  to  perpetual  conflict.  But 
who  can  define  *what  is  or  is  not  within  the  jurisdiction  of  he 
Church  in  faith  and  morals,  except  a  judge  who  knows  what  the 
Buhere  of  faith  and  morals  contains,  and  how  far  it  extends? 
Ld  surely  it  is  not  enough  that  such  a  judge  «»»?;?ld  g»^f «  ;/ 
oSne.  or  pronounce  uponloubtful  evidence,  or  with  an  uncer- 
Zn  knowledge-  Such  a  sentence  would  be,  not  an  end  of  con- 
tention, but  a  beginning  and  a  renewal  of  strife.  ^      ^       ^     ., 

"It  is  clear  tfat  the""  Civil  Power  can  not  define  how  far  the 
circumference  of  faith  and  morals  extends.  If  it  could  it  would 
be  invested  with  one  of  the  supernatural  endowmente  of  the 
Church  To  do  this  it  must  know  the  whole  deposit  of  explicit 
and  hnnlicit  faith ;  or,  in  other  words,  it  must  be  the  guardian 
of  theThrist  an  rivektion.  Now,  no  Christian,  nor  any  man  of 
sound  mind,  claims  this  for  the  Civil  Power.  fA^^? 

Civil  Power  be  not  competent  to  decide  the  limits  of  the  Spirit- 
nil  Power  and  if  the  Spiritual  Power  can  define  with  a  Diyme 
^rtTrnTy  its  own  limits^  it  is  evidently  supreme.     Or   m  other 
words,  the  Spiritual  Power  knows  vvith   Dmne  certainty  the 
limits  of  its  own  jurisdiction;  and  it  knows  therefore  the  limits 
a^d  the  competence  of  the  Civil  Power.    It  is  thereby  in  matters 
of  religion  and  conscience  supreme.   *      ^  .,..,.  ..       *i  ^„ 
If  tfe  Church  can  not  fix  the  limits  of  ite  jurisdiction,  then 
eitiier  nobody  can  or  the  State  must     But  the  State  can  not  un- 
less  it  claim  to  be  the  depository  and  expositor  of  the  Christian 
Revelation.    Therefore  itTs  the  Church  or  nobody     This  last 
fupposition  leads  to  chaos.    Now  if  this  be  '«f  ^^teMhe^^^^^ 
Ilone  can-  and  if  the  Church  can  fix  the  limits  of  its  own  juris- 
dJcSon Tt'can  fix  the  limits  of  all  other  jurisdietion ;  at  least,  so 
forTti)  warn  it  off  it«  own  domain.     6ut  this  was  my  conclu- 
sionT  andTJhough  I  have  seen  it  held  up  to  odium,  I  have  not  yet 

^^Tui're'chufch  being  the  highest  society,  and  independ^^^^^^^^ 
aU  others,  is  supreme  over  them,  in  so  far  as  Oie  eternal  happiness 

of  man  is  involved. 

From  this,  again,  two  consequences  tollow:  — 

1    First,  that  in  aU  things  which  are  PJ^eJy  temporal  and  he 
extra  finem  EcchsicE,  outside  of  the  end  of  the  Church,  it  neither 

'ts:ZdU.  K^  arthings  which  promote,  or  hinder,  the 
eternal  Cpm^^^^  of  men,  the  Church  has  a  power  to  judge  and 

^^^IV^^'s^ch  propositions  are  no  sooner  enunciated  than  we  are 
met  by  a  tumult  of  voices,  such  as  those  of  Janus,  Q^I^^^JT- 
Zl  r  lament  to  detoct  the  t«nes  of  a  voice  hitherto  heard  m 
behalf  of  the  authority  of  Chnstianitv  and  of  the^^^"»tian 
Chui^hAlS^i^^  that^t^e  Church  o/ Rome  and  its  Pontiffs 

♦  Cksarism  and  UUramontanisnif  pp.  24,  35. 


MS 


BEIJITI05S  OF  TBI 


elaiin  supreme  temporal  *  power,  and  iliftt  direct,  over  mil  Tem- 
Bonil  Princes  and  tnings ;  to  be  ueed  at  their  discretion  even  to 
ih^  deposing  of  Kings,  to  tlie  absolution  of  subjects  from  alle- 
gimice,  to  the  employment  of  foroe,  imprii»onment,  torture,  and 

iMtk  » 

If  sueh  be  the  state  of  our  highest  minds,  we  oan  not  regret 
that  this  discussion  has  been  forc^  upon  us.  It  has  come  not  by 
our  act  It  has  arisen  in  its  time  appointed.  It  will  for  awhile 
ffiise  alarm  and  suspicion;  it  will  kindle  animosity  and  encour- 
age bigotry :  but  it  will  manifest  the  truth  with  a  wider  light 
than  England  has  seen  for  three  hundred  years.  I  will  therefore 
H^eely  and  frmaldly  enter  uoon  this  debate,  and,  in  order  to  be 
clear,  I  will  treat  the  subject  under  the  foUowing  proposi- 
tions :  — 

1.  The  authority  of  Frinoes  and  the  allegiance. of  subjects  in 
the  Civil  State  of  nature  is  of  Divine  ordinance;  and,  therefore, 
BO  long  as  Princes  and  their  laws  are  in  conformity  to  the  law  of 
Dod,  the  Church  has  no  power  or  jurisdiction  against  them,  nor 
over  them. 

2.  If  Princes  and  their  laws  deviate  Ihim  the  law  of  Ood,  the 
Church  has  authority  from  God  to  judge  of  that  deviation,  and  to 
oblige  to  its  correction. 

3.  The  authority  which  the  Chareh  has  from  God  for  this  end 
is  not  temporal,  but  spiritual. 

4.  This  spiritual  authority  is  not  direct  in  its  incidence  on  tem- 
poral things,  but  only  indirect:  that  is  to  say,  it  directly  promotes 
]1»  own  spiritual  end ;  it  indirectly  condemns  and  declares  not 
binding  on  the  conscience  such  tetnpwal  laws  as  deviate  from  the 
law  of  'God,  and  therefore  impede  or  render  impossible  the  attain- 
ment of  the  eternal  happiness  of  man. 

5.  This  spiritual  authority  is  inherent  in  tlie  Divine  constitution 
and  commission  of  the  Church ;  but  its  exercise  in  the  world 
depends  on  certain  moral  and  material  conditions,  by  which  alone 
ito  ozeraise  is  rendered  either  {)0S8ibIe  or  just. 

I  have  affirmed  that  the  relations  of  the  Catholic  Church  to  the 
Civil  powers  are  fixed  primarily  by  the  Divine  constitution  of  the 
Church  and  of  the  Civil  Bocie^  of  men.  But  it  is  also  true  that 
tfiese  relations  have  been  declared  by  the  Church  in  acts  and 
decrees  which  are  of  infallible. authority.  Such,  for  instance,  is 
the  Bull  of  Boniface  YIII.,  Vimm  Sanctam,  As  this  has  become 
the  text  and  center  of  the  whole  controversy  at  this  moment,  we 
will  fully  treat  of  it.  This  Boll,  then,  was  beyond  all  doubt  an 
act  m  cathedra.  It  was  also  confirmed  by  Leo  X.  in  the  Fifth 
Jjalemn  £cnmenical  Council  Whatever  definition,  therefore,  is 
to  be  found  in  this  Bull  is  to  be  received  as  of  laith.  Let  it  be 
noted  that  the  Unam  Sanctam  does  not  depend  upon  the  Vatican 
Council  for  its  infallible  authority.  It  was  from  the  date  of  its 
publication  an  infallible  act«  obliging  all  Catholics  to  receive  it 
with  interior  assent.  I>octrineB  identical  with  those  of  the  Unam 
Stmcimm  had  been  deolared  in  two  Ecumenical  Councils—namely, 


*  ExpottMlaJUmif  p.  27. 


SPIRITUAL  AXD  CIVIL  POWERS. 


153 


in  the  Fourth  Itateran  in  1215,  and  the  First  of  Lyons  in  1245.* 
On  this  ground,  therefore,  I  have  affirmed  that  the  relations  of  the 
Spiritual  and  Civil  Powers  were  immutably  fixed  before  the  Vati- 
can Council  met,  and  that  they  have  been  in  no  way  changed  by 

it 

V.  We  will  now  examine,  (1)  the  complete  text  of  the  Uimm 
Sanctam ;  (2)  the  interpretations  of  its  assailants  and  its  defend- 
ers ;  (3)  the  interpretation  which  is  of  obligation  on  all  Catholics. 

1.  The  Bull  was  published  bv  Boniface  VUI.,  in  1302,  during 
the  contest  with  Philip  le  Bel  of  France. 

Before  the  BuU  was  published,  the  Regalists  or  partisans  of  the 
King  declared  that  the  Pope  had  claimed,  as  Mr.  Gladstone  also 
supposes,  to  be  supreme  over  the  King,  both  in  spiritual  and  in 
temporal  things.  The  Chancellor  Flotte  made  this  assertion  in 
the  year  1301,  at  Paris,  in  the  Church  of  Notre  Dame.  The  car- 
dinals sent  by  Boniface  declared  that  the  Pope  made  no  such 
claim ;  that  he  claimed  no  temporal,  but  only  a  spiritual  power.f 
Nevertheless  this  prejudice,  once  created,  before  the  publication 
of  the  Unam  Sanctam,  ensured  its  being  misinterpreted  when 
it  was  issued.  Boniface,  by  the  Bull  Auscidta  Fili,  had  promptly 
exposed  this  misinterpretation.    But  the  prejudice  was  already 

established.! 
I  will  now  give  the  whole  text  of  the  Bull,  before  commenting 

upon  it    It  runs  as  follows :  — 

"  We  are  bound  to  believe  and  to  hold,  by  the  obligation  of 
faith,  one  Holy  Church,  Catholic  and  also  Apostolic;  and  this 
(Church)  we  firmly  believe  and  in  simplicity  confess:  out  of 
which  there  is  neither  salvation  nor  remission  of  sins.  As  the 
Bridegroom  declares  in  the  Canticles,  '  One  is  my  dove,  my  per- 
fect one,  she  is  the  only  one  of  her  mother,  the  chosen  of  her  that 
bore  her ; '  §  who  represents  the  one  mystical  Body,  the  Head  of 
which  is  Christ;  and  the  Head  of  Christ  is  God.  In  which  (the 
one  Church)  there  is  one  Lord,  one  Faith,  one  Baptism.  ||  For  in 
the  time  of  the  Flood  the  ark  of  Noe  was  one,  prefiguring  the  one 
Church,  which  was  finished  in  one  cubit,  f  and  had  one  governor 
and  ruler,  that  is  Noe ;  outside  of  which  we  read  that  all  things 
subsisting  upon  earth  were  destroyed.  This  also  we  venerate  as 
one,  as  the  Lord  says  in  the  Prophet,  '  Deliver,  O  God,  my  soul 
from  the  sword :  my  only  one  from  the  hand  of  the  dog.'  ** 

"  For  He  prayed  for  the  soul,  that  is,  for  Himself;  for  the 
Head  together  with  the  Body :  by  which  Body  he  designated  the 
one  only  Church,  because  of  the  unity  of  the  Bridegroom,  of  the 
Faith,  of  the  Sacraments,  and  of  the  charity  of  the  Church. 
This  is  that  coat  of  the  Lord  without  seam,ft  which  was  not  rent, 
but  went  by  lots.  Therefore  of  that  one  and  only  Church  there 
is  one  body  and  one  Head,  not  two  heads  as  of  a  monster; 


♦Bellarmin.  De  PMest.  Papse.  in  praef.  p.  844,  Cologne,  1617. 
t  DoUinger's  Church  Blstorif,  vol.  iv.  p.  90. 
i  Ibid,  p!  91.  §  Cant.  vi.  8.  |  F^phesians  iv.  5. 

\  Genesis  vi.  16.  »*  P»alm  xxi.  21.  t1  St.  John  xix.  23, 24. 


m 


UiATlOHS  or  THB 


1 1 

i  III 


namely,  Christ  and  Christ's  Vicar,  Peter  and  Peter's  successor; 
for  the  Lord  Himself  said  to  Peter,  *  Feed  mv  sheep.*  *  Mine, 
lio  Mja  genorallj;  and  not,  in  jjarticolar,  these  or  those:  by 
wliioli  He  is  known  to  have  committed  all  to  him.  If,  therefore, 
Greeks  or  others  say  that  they  were  not  committed  to  Peter  and 
Ik  successors,  they  must  necessarily  oonfess  that  they  are  not 
of  the  sheep  of  Christ,  for  the  Lord  said  (in  the  Gospel)  by  John, 
that  there  is  'One  fold,  and  one  only  shepherd.' f.  %  ^^ 
wmM  of  the  Gospel  we  are  instructed  that  in  this  his  (that  is 
Peter's)  power  there  are  two  swords,  the  spiritual  and  the  tem- 
poral. ¥qt  when  the  Apostles  say,  'Behold,  here  are  two 
■words,'  that  is,!  in  the  Church,  the  Lord  did  not  saj,  '  It  is  too 
much,*  but  *  it  is  enough.'  Assuredly,  he  who  denies  that  the 
teniBonil  sword  is  in  the  power  of  Peter,  gives  ill  heed  to  the 
word  of    the  Lord,  saying,  'Pnt  up  again  thy  sword  into  its 

place.'  I 

"  Both,  therefore,  the  spiritual  sword  and  the  material  sword 
are  in  the  power  of  tne  Church.  But  the  latter  (the  ma- 
terial sword)  is  to  be  wielded  on  behalf  op  the  Church;  the  for- 
mer (the  spiritual)  is  to  be  wielded  by  the  Church;  the  one  by 
the  hand  of  the  priest;  the  other  by  the  hand  of  kings  and  sol- 
diers, but  at  the  suggestion  and  sufferance  of  the  priest  The 
one  sword  ought  to  be  subject  to  the  other,  and  the  temporal  au- 
thority ought  to  be  subject  to  the  spiritual  power.  For  whereas 
the  Apostle  says,  'There  is  no  power  but  from  God;  and  those 
that  are,  are  ordained  of  God ; '  |[  thej  would  not  be  ordained  (or 
ordered)  if  one  sword  were  not  subject  to  the  other,  and  as  the 
inferior  directed  by  the  other  to  the  highest  end.  For,  accord- 
ing to  the  blessed  Dionysius,  it  is  the  law  of  the  Divine  order 
that  the  lowest  should  be  guided  to  the  highest  by  those  that  are 
intermediate.  Therefore,  according  to  the  order  of  the  universe, 
all  things  are  not  in  equal  and  immediate  subordination;  but 
the  lowest  things  are  set  in  order  by  things  intermediate,  and 
titinfm  inferior  by  things  superior.  We  ought,  therefore,  as 
islMirij  to  oonfess  that  the  spiritual  power,  both  in  dignitjr  and 
ezeellence,  exceeds  any  eartbly  power,  in  proportion  as  spiritual 
thinge  are  better  than  things  temporal.  This  we  see  clearly  from 
the  giving,  and  blessing,  and  sanctifying  of  tithes,  from  the  re- 
OtptMin  of  the  power  itself,  and  from  the  government  of  the  same 
things.  For,  as  the  truth  bears  witness,  the  spiritual  power  has 
to  instruct,  and  judge  the  earthly  power,  if  it  be  not  gr»od;  and 
thus  the  prophecy  of  Jeremias  is  verified  of  the  Church  and  the 
eeeksiasticaf  power :  •  Lo,  I  have  set  thee  this  day  over  the  na- 
tions and  over  kin^oms,'  etc.f  If,  tlierefore,  the  earthly  power 
deviates  (from  its  end),  it  will  be  judged  bv  the  spiritual ;  but  if 
m  lesser  spiritual  power  transgresses,  it  will  be  judged  by  its  su- 
perior; but  if  the  supreme  (deviates),  it  can  be  judged,  not  by 
■wn,  but  bf  God  alone,  according  to  the  words  of  the  Apostle : 
•fhe  spiritual  man  judges  all  things;  he  himself  is  judged  by  no 

♦  Bt  John  xxi.  17.       t  St.  John  x.  16.       t  St.  Luke  xxii.  38. 
}SL  Matthew  xxvi.  62.  |  Romans  xiii.  1.        1  Jeremiah  i.  10. 


SPIRITUAL  AND  CIVIL  POWERS. 


155 


one,**  Thiff  authority,  though  given  to  man  and  exercised 
through  man,  is  not  human,  but  rather  Divine — ^iven  by  the  Di- 
vine voice  to  Peter,  and  confirmed  to  him  and  his  successors  in 
Him  whom  Peter  confessed,  the  Rock,  for  the  Lord  said  to  Peter: 
*  Whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  upon  earth,  it  shall  be  bound  also 
in  heaven ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth,  it  shall  be 
loosed  also  in  heaven.'  f 

"  Whosoever  therefore  resists  this  power  that  is  so  ordered  by 
God,  resists  the  ordinance  of  God, J:  unless,  as  Manichaeus  did,  he 
feign  to  himself  two  principles,  which  we  condemn  as  false  and 
heretical;  for,  as  Moses  witnesses,  'God  created  heaven  and 
earth  not  in  the  beginnings,  but  in  the  beginning.'  §  Moreover, 
we  declare,  affirm,  define,  and  pronounce  it  to  be  necessary  to 
salvation  for  every  human  creature  to  be  subject  to  the  Boman 
Pontiff." 

2.  We  will  next  take  the  interpretations.  They  may  be  put 
into  three  classes : — 

(1)  First,  of  those  who  assailed  it  at  the  time. 

The  theologians  and  doctors  of  the  school  at  Paris  had  always 
taught  by  a  constant  tradition  that  the  Popes  possessed  a  spirit- 
ual and  indirect  power  over  temporal  things.  John  Gerson  may 
be  taken  as  the  representative  of  them  all.  He  says  the  ecclesi- 
astical power  does  not  possess  the  dominion  and  the  rights  of 
earthly  and  of  heavenly  empire,  so  that  it  mav  dispose  at  will  of 
the  goods  of  the  clergy,  and  much  less  of  the  laity ;  though  it 
must  be  conceded  that  it  has  in  these  things  an  authority  {domin- 
ium^  to  rule,  to  direct,  to  regulate,  and  to  ordain.  ||  Such  was 
the  doctrine  of  Almain,  Alliacus,  John  of  Paris,  and  of  the  old 
Sorbonne.  It  was  also  the  doctrine  of  the  theologians  of  the 
Council  of  Constance;  who  are  always  quoted  as  opponents  of 
the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope,  because  they  held  that,  though  the 
See  of  Rome  could  not  err,  he  that  sat  in  it  might  err.  They 
likewise  held  the  deposing  power,  which  alone  is  enough  to  show 
how  little  the  definition  of  the  Infallibility  has  to  do  with  the 
deposition  of  Kings. 

When  the  Unam  Sanctam  was  published,  Egidius  Romanus, 
the  Archbishop  of  Bourges,  wrote  against  it,  being  deceived  into 
a  belief  that  Boniface  claimed  a  direct  temporal  power  over  the 
King  of  France,  over  and  above  that  power  which  had  always 
been  admitted  in  France  according  to  the  Bull  Notdi  of  Innocent 
in. — ^vii,,  an  indirect  spiritual  power  in  temporal  matters  when 
involving  sin.Tf  The  same  course  was  taken  by  other  French 
writers 

Boniface  had  already  declared  in  a  Consistory  in  1302  that  he 
had  never  assumed  any  jurisdiction  which  belonged  to  the  King; 


♦  1  Corinthians  ii.  15.  t  St.  Matthew  xvi.  19. 

t  Romans  xiii.  2.  g  Genesis  i.l. 

fjoann.  Gerson,  De   Potest  Eccles.     Consid.   xu.      Bianchi,  IMIMI 
Fotegtd  et  della  Politia  ddla  Chiemy  torn.  i.  lib.  i.  cap.  xi. 
\  Bianchi,  lib.  i.  cap,  x. 


I 


IM 


BBUkflONfl  OF  TBI 


SPIRITUAL  AXD  CITIL  POWERS. 


157 


but  liiat  he  had  declared  the  King  to  be,  like  any  other  Chris* 
tian,  subject  to  him  only  in  regard  to  sin.* 

(2)  Secondly,  the  Be^iliats  once  more  assailed   the  Unam 
'tmeiaM  in  the  reign  of  Lonis  XIY. 

Bianohi  says  that  there  is  not  to  be  found  a  writer  in  France, 
before  Calvin,  who  denied  this  indirect  spiritual  power;  that  the 
denial  was  introduced  by  the  Huguenots  about  the  year  1626 ;  that 
the  Sorbonne  began  to  adhere  to  it,  and  reduced  it  to  a  formula 
in  1662.t  Bossuet  endeavors  to  fasten  on  the  Unam  Sanctam 
the  old  Begalist  interpretation,  and  affirms  that  it  was  withdrawn 
by  Clement  V.:  which  statement  is  contrary  to  the  fact.  Clem- 
ent v.,  on  the  contrary,  interprets  the  Bull  in  the  true  sense,  as 
Bonilice  had  done,  declaring  that  Boniface  did  not  thereby  sub- 
ject the  King,  or  the  Kingdom  of  France,  in  any  greater  degree 
to  the  authority  of  the  Pontiff  than  they  had  been  before,  that  is, 
iiocordina;  to  the  Bull  of  Innocent  III.  Novii,  and  the  doctrines 
iif  the  old  Sorbonne. ll 

fhe  history  of  the  Four  Gallican  Articles,  and  of  the  writers 
who  defended  them,  is  too  well  known  to  need  repetition. 

(3)  We  come,  lastly,  to  those  who  have  assailed  it  at  this  time, 
it  is  not  a  little  wearisome  to  read  the  same  old  stories  over 

affain;  and  to  be  told  as  "scientific  history"  that  Boniface  VIII. 
ewimed  to  have  received  both  swords  as  his  own,  to  be  held  in 
his  own  hand,  and  wielded  by  him  in  direct  temporal  jurisdiction 
over  temporal  princes..  We  nave  all  this  raked  up  again  in  Janua, 
From  Jmm  it  goes  to  newspapers,  magazines,  and  pamphlets. 
Any  body  can  interpret  a  Pope's  Ball.  There  is  no  need  of  a 
knowledge  of  contemporary  facts,  or  of  the  terminology  of  the 
Civil  or  Canon  Law,  or  of  Pontifical  Acts,  or  of  the  technical 
meaning  of  words.  A  dictionary,  and  a  stout  heart  to  attack  the 
Pope,  is  enough.  Such  men  would  have  ns  believe,  against  all 
ihe  Popes,  that  thev  have  claimed  temporal  power,  properly  so 
oalled,  over  temporal  Princes. 

VI  I  will,  therefore,  now  give  what  may  be  aflirmed  to  be  the 
true  and  legitimate  interpretation  of  the  Unam  Sanctam. 

It  can  not  be  better  stated  than  in  the  words  of  Dr.  Dollinger.J 

ri"#l  IMnriEtf^H   Liltlft  *    ■■■ III! 

"Boniface  opened  the  council,  at  which  there  were  present 
§mm.  France  four  archbishops,  thirty-five  bishops,  and  six  abbots, 
in  November,  1302.  One  consequence  of  this  council  appears  to 
have  been  the  celebrated  decretal  Unam  Sanctam,  which  was 
made  public  on  the  18th  of  November,  and  which  contains  an 
•iposition  of  the  relations  between  the  spiritual  and  teniporal 
powers.  In  the  Church,  it  says,  there  are  two  jiowers,  a  tem- 
poral and  spiritual,  and  as  far  as  they  are  both  in  the  Church, 
they  have  both  the  same  end ;  the  temporal  power,  the  inferior, 


•Bollinger's  HM&ry  of  Churehf  vol.  iv.  p.  91. 

t  Lib.  i.  cap.  xiii.  .  „  ,,     ^     ^    *  x,     ^i 

i  In  the  Appendix  A  will  he  found  in  full  the  Text  of  the  three 
Pontifical  Acts,  JVofK,  Unmn  Samctam,  MeruU, 
I  Hiii,  iv.  p.  91. 


is  subject  to  the  spiritual,  the  higher  and  morO  noble;  the  former 
must  be  guided  and  directed  by  the  latter,  as  the  body  is  by  tho 
soul ;  it  receives  from  the  spiritual  its  consecration  and  its  direc- 
tion to  its  highest  object,  and  must  therefore,  should  it  ever  dc- 
fart  from  its  destined  path,  be  corrected  by  the  spiritual  power* 
fc  is  a  truth  of  faith  that  all  men,  even  kings,  are  subject  to  the 
Pope;  if,  therefore,  they  should  be  guilty  of  grievous  sins,  in 
peace  or  in  war,  or  in  the  government  of  their  kin^oms,  and  the 
treatment  of  their  subjects,  and  should  thus  lose  sight  of  the  ob- 
ject to  which  the  power  of  a  Christian  Prince  should  be  directed, 
and  should  give  public  scandal  to  the  people,  the  Pope  can  admon- 
ish them,  since  m  regard  to  sin  they  are  subject  to  the  spiritual 
power;  he  can  correct  them;  and,  if  necessity  should  require  it, 
compel  them  by  censures  to  remove  such  scandals.    For  if  they 
were  not  subject  to  the  censures  of  the  Church,  whenever  they 
might  sin  in  the  exercise  of  the  power  entrusted  to  them,  it  would 
follow  that  as  kings  they  were  out  of  the  Church;  that  the  two 
powers  would  be  totally  distinct  from  each  other;  and  that  ther 
were  descended  from  distinct  and  even  opposed  principles,  which 
would  be  an  error  approaching  to  the  heresy  of  the  Manichees. 
It  was  therefore  the  indirect  power  of  the  Church  over  the  tem- 
poral power  of  kings  which  tiie  Pope  defended  in  these  Bulls ; 
and  he  had  designedly  extracted  the  strongest  passages  of  them 
from  the  writings  of  two  French  theologians,  St.  Bernard  and 
Hugo  of  St.  Victor." 

The  interpretation  given  here  by  l>r.  Bollinger  is  undoubtedly 
correct.     All  Catholics  are  bound  to  assent  to  the  doctrines  here! 
declared;  for  though  they  are  not  here  defined,  yet  they  are  cer-( 
tainly  true.     The  only  definition,  properly  so  called,  in  the  Bull  is 
contained  in  the  last  sentence. 

Now,  upon  the  doctrines  declared  by  the  Bull  it  is  to  be  ob- 
served  !*~~' 

1 .  That  it  does  not  say  that  the  two  swords  were  given  by  our 
Lord  to  the  Church ;  but  that  the  two  swords  are  in  poiesiate  Ee- 
clesicB,  "  in  the  power  of  the  Church." 

2.  That  it  at  once  goes  on  to  distinguish  "  Both  (swords)  are  in 
the  power  of  the  Church,  the  spiritual,  that  is,  and  the  material. 
But  this  (the  material)  is  to  be  used  for  the  Church;  that  (the 
spiritual)  is  to  be  used  hy  the  Church.  This,  indeed  (by  the 
hand),  of  the  Priest;  that,  by  the  hand  of  kings  and  soldiers,  but 
at  the  bidding  and  sufferance  of  the  Priest." 

3.  That  though  both  swords  are  in  the  Church,  they  are  held  in 
different  hands,  and  to  be  used  by  the  subordination  of  the  one  to 
the  other.  Oporiet  autem  gladium  esse  sub  gladio :  the  one 
sword  must  be  subordinate  to  the  other,  the  lower  to  the  higher. 

4.  That  Boniface  VIII.,  in  this  very  Bull  Unam  Sanctam,  ex- 
pressly declares  that  the  power  given  to  Peter  was  the  "  Suprema 
Spiritnalis  potestas"  not  the  Temporal,  or  a  mixed  power,  but 
purely  Soiritual,  which  may  judge  all  Powers,  but  itself  is  judged 

of  God  alone.  "       .  x  ^    v 

Now,  on  tho  principles  already  laid  down,  there  ought  to  be  no 
,  difficulty  in  rightly  and  clearly  understanding  this  doctrine. 


I 


I 


158 


BBLATIOKS  OF  TUB. 


SPIRITUAL    AND  CIVIL  POWERS. 


159 


1.  For  first  the  Material  Swofd  is  ••  oM  te  human  society.  It 
was  not  given  by  grace,  nor  held  by  grace,  which  is  a  heresy  con- 
demned m  Wicklif  by  the  Council  of  Ck)n8tjince ;  but  it  belongs 
to  the  Civil  Ruler  in  the  order  of  nature,  as  St.  Paul,  speaking  of 
the  heathen  empire,  says:  "He  beareth  not  the  sword  in  vain;  for 
lie  is  the  minister  of  God  to  execute  wrath." 

Nothing  but  want  of  care  or  thought  could  have  led  men  to 
iimt  this,  which  is  a  truth  and  fact  of  the  natural  order. 

When  any  prince  by  baptism  became  Christian,  he  became  sub- 
ject to  the  law  of  God  an«f  to  the  Church  as  its  expositor.  He  be- 
came subject,  not  only  as  a  man.  but  as  a  prince ;  not  only  in  the 
iutiM  of  his  privatB  life,  but  in  the  duties  of  his  public  Kfo  atoo. 
But  this  did  not  deprive  hum  of  the  civil  sword,  nor  of  any  of  the 

CrifAis  of  the  natural  order.*  OpcrUi  autem  gladium  esft  tub 
^io.  The  Bull  declares  that  the  Material  Sword  which  he 
Uriit  with  him  when  he  was  baptised  ought  to  be  subject  to 
<|it  Spiritual  Sword.  But  it  nowhere  says  that  the  Material 
Bwofd  was  given  to  the  Church,  or  that  the  Church  gave  it  to  the 
IsMrial  Kuler.  It  is  in  the  Church,  because  he  that  bears  it  is 
in  lie  Church.  It  is  the  office  of  the  Church  to  consecrate  it,  and 
(immutre)  to  imtrMCt  it.  But  it  belongs  essentially  to  the  nat- 
ural order,  though  it  is  to  be  exercised  according  to  the  supernat- 

iiial  order  of  faith.  .. .    ^,  j.  ^i^ 

2.  When  it  is  said  that  both  Swords  are  "in  the  power  of  the 
Church:*  it  means  that  the  Church  in  a  Christian  world  includ^ 
the  natural  oider  in  its  unity.  The  conception  of  the  <^h«rch 
iaeiuded  the  whole  complex  Christian  Society,  made  up  of  both 
powers,  united  in  a  complete  visible  unity.  . 

Mr  Bryce,  in  his  excellent  work  on  the  Holy  Roman  Empire, 

•Thus  the  Holy  Roman  Church  and  the  Holy  Roman  Empire 
are  one  and  the  same  thing  in  two  aspects;  and  Catholicism,  the 

Sinciple  of  the  universal  Christian  Society,  is  also  Romanism: 
at  isi  rests  upon  Rome  as  the  origin  and  type  of  universality, 
manifesting  it§elf  in  a  mystic  dualism  which  corresponds  to  the 
two  natures  of  its  Founder.  As  Divine  and  eternal,  its  head  is 
the  Pope,  to  whom  all  souls  have  been  entrusted ;  as  human  and 
temporal,  the  Emperor,  commissioned  to  rule  mens  bodies  and 

Mr.  Bryce  has  here  cleariy  seen  the  concrete  unity  of  the 
Christian  world;  but  he  has  missed  the  order  which  creates  that 
unity.  His  description  is  what  Boniface  VIII.  calls  "a  monster 
with  two  heads."  Mr.  Bryce  quotes  this  saying  in  a  note.  If 
he  had  mastered  the  spiritual  element  as  he  has  mastered  the 
political.  Mr.  Bryoe's  book  would  have  ranked  very  high  among 

jrreat  authors.  . 

Mr.  Freeman  in  an  article  on  Mr.  Bryce's  book,  is  nearer  to 
Hift  true  conception.     He  writes  as  follows :  , 

"He  theory  of  the  MediiBval  Empire  is  that  of  an  universal 

•Bianchi  lib.  i.  cap.  iv.  ,M.n«,ni«„  ift7i  \ 

t  The  JMrj  Rmmn  Brnptre,  p.  108.    (Macmillan,  1871.) 


Christian  Monarchy.  The  Roman  Empire  and  the  Catholic 
Church  are  two  aspects  of  one  Society."  •  •  •  J'  ^  "^«  ^^ 
of  this  Society,  in  its  temporal  character  as  an  Empire,  stands 
the  temporal  chief  of  Christendom,  the  Roman  Caesar;  at  its 
head,  in  its  spiritual  character  as  a  Church,  stands  the  spiritual 
chief  of  Christendom,  the  Roman  Pontiff.  Caesar  and  Pontiff 
alike  rule  by  Divine  right."  *  ,       i     -c 

Now  here  are  two  things  to  be  noted.  First,  that  the  Emperor 
holds  an  office  of  human  creation ;  the  Pontiff  an  office  of  Divine 
creation.  Secondly,  that  the  office  of  Divine  creation  is  for  a 
higher  end  than  the  office  which  is  of  human  origin.  The  fo^ 
mer  is  for  the  eternal,  the  latter  for  the  earthly  happiness  of 

jnan.  —  v^*  •  i» 

But  as  I  have  said  before,  the  office  of  Dmne  creation,  or- 
dained to  guide  men  to  an  eternal  end,  is  higher  than  the  office 
of  human  origin,  directed  to  an  earthly  and  temporal  end;  and 
in  this  the  perfect  unity  and  subordination  of  the  whole  is  consti- 
tuted and  preserved.  ,  ,,  ,^  i.  .  i. 
Nevertheless,  both  Mr.  Bryce  and  Mr.  Freeman  bring  out 
clearly  what  Boniface  means  when  he  says  that  the  two  swords 
are  in  Ecclesiajn  the  Church,  and  inpotestate  Ecclesioi,  %n  the 

power  of  the  Church.  r        xu    i  x    n 

To  this  I  may  add  the  following  passage  from  the  late  Car- 
dinal Tarquini,t  who  states  the  whole  subject  with  great  pre- 

ciBion  *^~~> 

"The  Civil  Society  of  Catholics  b  distinguished  from  others 
by  this— that  it  consists  of  the  same  assemblage  of  men  as  the 
Church  of  Christ,  that  is,  the  Catholic  Church,  consists  of:  so 
that  it  in  no  way  constitutes  a  real  body  diverse  and  separate 
from  the  Church;  but  both  (societies)  together  have  the  charac- 
ter of  a  twofold  federative  association  and  obligation  inhering  in 
the  same  multitude  of  men,  whereby  the  Civil  Society  under  the 
Bovernment  of  the  Civil  Magistrate  exerts  its  powers  to  secure  the 
temporal  happiness  of  men,  and,  under  the  government  of  the 
Church,  to  secure  eternal  life ;  and  in  such  wise  .that  eternal  life 
be  acknowledged  to  be  the  last  and  supreme  end  to  which  tem- 
poral happiness  and  the  whole  temporal  life  is  subordinate;  be- 
cause if  any  man  do  not  acknowledge  this,  he  neither  belongs  to 
the  Catholic  Church,  nor  may  call  himself  Catholic.  Such,  then, 
is  the  true  notion  of  the  Civil  Society  of  Catholics.  It  is  a  so- 
ciety of  men  who  so  pursue  the  happiness  of  this  life  as  thereby 
to  show  that  it  ought  to  be  subordinate  to  the  attainment  of  etei- 
nal  happiness,  which  they  believe  can  be  attained  alone  under 
the  direction  of  the  Catholic  Church,"  ^,^    „         « 

We  have  here  the  full  and  genuine  doctrine  of  the  Unam  banc- 
iam— the  one  body,  the  two  swords,  the  subordination  of  the 
material  to  the  spiritual  sword,  the  indirect  power  of  the  spirit- 
ual over  the  temporal  whensoever  it  deviates  from  the  eternal 
end. 


I 

ii 

I 


♦  Freeman's  ITtstorical  Emty^  pp.  13€^137.    (^lacmiTlan,  1872.) 
tTarquini,  Juris  Ecd.  PMici  Listitiaiones,  p.  56.    (Kome,  liii6.) 


160 


BKfJiTIONS  OF  THE 


Dr.  Bollingpr't  interpreWioii.  then,  la  8^"^%  *^<>";tt"  p wJk 
"II  was  therefore,"  he  says,  "the  mdirect  power  of  the  Church 
mm  the  temporal  power  of  Kingp  which  the  Pope  defended  in 
theie  Biilli;  'Hiot  tW  power  of  the  Pope  is  ^^^^f f  "*;*^^^., 

VIIL  Ffom  this  doctrine  Cardinal  Tarquim  draws  the  follow- 

ine  conclusions :  .  .  .     .«     x  i a  i^p 

1.  In  things  temporal,  and  in  respect  to  ttie  temporal  end  {fit 
Government),  the  Church  has  no  power  m  Civil  eociety. 

The  proof  of  this  proposition  is  that  all  things  merely  temp^ 
nl^i^mterjinem  ^cluia,)  beside,  or  outoide  of  ti>e  end  of 
iM  Chsrok  It  is  a  general  rule  that  no  society  has  no  power  m 
IhoM  things  which  are  out  of  its  own  proper  end 

2.  In  w&tsoever  things,  whether  essentiaUy  or  by  accident,  m 
fpirttual  end,  that  is,  the  end  of  the  Church,  is  necessarily  in- 
▼oked,  in  those  things,  though  they  be  temporal,  tiieC^^^^^ 
may  bV  right  exert  its  power,  and  the  Civil  State  ought  to  yield  * 

/n  ties?  two  propositions  we  have  the  ?«"  «»Fl»«*tl«»  f  *^« 
indirect  spiritual  power  of  the  Church.    I  give  it  in  Ciirdinal  lar- 

"  mreetiy  the  care  of  temporal  happiness  alone  belongs  to  the 
Btate,  but  indirectly  the  office  also  of  protecting  morals  and 
reIi»on;  so,  however,  that  this  be  done  dependently  on  the 
ChuTh,  forasmuch  as  the  Church  is  a  society  to  which  the  care 
of  religion  and  morals  is  directly  committod. 

"  Thtt  which  in  the  Civil  Society  is  indirect  and  dependent,  is 
direct  and  independent  in  the  Church ;  and.  on  the  other  hand, 
the  end  which  iiproper  and  direct  to  the  Civil  State,  that  is,  tern- 
pTril  happiness,  Lls^nly  indireetly,  or  so  far  as  the  spiritual 
end  requires,  under  the  power  of  the  Church. 

"  The  result  of  all  this  is—  ^       .  u«-  «#  ;#  Im. 

"  1  That  the  Civil  Society,  even  though  every  member  of  it  be 
Catholic,  is  not  subject  to  the  Church,  but  plainly  independent  in 
temporal  things  which  regard  itstemporal  end. 

••r  That  thT  language  of  the  Fathers,  which  seems  to  affirm  f 
an  absoluto  indepe^See  of  the  Civil  State,  is  to  be  brought 

within  this  limit.  ^  , ,         .x      •     *k«  w^*<ia 

VIII   I  will  now  give  a  summary  of  this  matter  in  tnc  woras 

of  Suarez    and  also  his  comment  on  the  terminology  used  by 

^trrX^lthe^Jnion'tS  the  Pontiff  h»  thU  direct 

temporal  power  over  the  Church.  k«^„  offi,.m<wi— 

Hethengives  as  the  true  opinion  that  which  has  been  affirmea— 

MMiely.  thit  the  Pontiff  has  not  direct  i<^l'«'*«^^P^^«'^V®^TJ^i'^ 
S^e  Ws  of  which  he  is  Temporal  Prince;  but  that  he  has  a 
smrilMtd  power  indirectly  over  temporal  toings,  in  so  lar  as  mey 
aibot  the  salvation  of  men  or  involve  sin.  J 

•Tarqulni,  Juris  EccL  PtMid  ImtUidime*,  p.  57. 

fibidf.  p.  55  and  note.      _ 

i  Suarei,  Be  Legibm,  lib.  iii.  c.  vi. 


SPIRITUAL  AND  CITIL  FOWBRS. 


161 


One  chief  cause  of  the  confusion  of  Regalists  and  our  non- 
Catholic  adversaries  has  been  the  uncertain  use  of  language,  and 
the  want  of  a  fixed  terminology  until  a  certain  date. 

The  word  Temporal  was  used  in  two  senses.  It  was  used  to 
signify  the  power  of  Civil  Rnlen  in  the  order  of  nature.  And  in 
this  sense  the  Church  has  never  claimed  it  for  its  h^.  It  was 
used  also  to  signify  the  spiritual  power  of  the  Pontiff  when  wm^ 
dent  indirectly  mton  temporal  things.  The  spiritual  power,  then, 
had  a  temporal  effect,  and  took,  so  to  speak,  its  color  and  name 
from  that  use,  remaining  always  spiritual  as  before.  

For  instance,  we  speak  of  the  "  Colonial  power  of  tlie  Crown, 
meaning  the  Imperial  power  applied  to  the  ffovernment  of  the 
Colonics ;  in  like  manner  the  spiritual  power  of  the  Pope,  appjte* 
indirectly  to  temporal  things,  was  {impropHe)  improperly  caUed 
Temporal,  and  this  usus  loquendi  gave  rise  to  much  misinterpre- 

What  I  have  here  stated  was  the  judgment  of  Bellmnine, 
Hho,  in  his  ansvrer  to  Barclay,  writes  as  follows :  — -  ' 

"  Barclay  says  that  there  are  two  opinions  among  Catholics  (on 
the  power  of  the  Pontiff).  The  one,  which  most  Canonists  fol- 
low, affirms  that  in  the  Supreme  Pontiff,  as  Vicar  of  Christ,  b^ 
powers  Spiritual  and  Temporal,  exist;  the  other,  which  is  the 
common  opinion  of  Theologians,  affirms  that  the  power  of  the 
Supreme  Pontiff,  as  Vicar  of  Christ,  is  strictly  spiritual  m  itself; 
but  that,  nevertheless,  he  may,  by  the  same,  dispose  temporal 
things  so  that  they  be  ordered  for  spiritual  ends.   * 

Barclay  argued  that  the  power  of  the  Pope  in  temporal  thin^si 
was  a  free  and  open  opinion  among  Catholics :  Bellarmine,  in 

"^^f'^hat  thfs' power  is  in  the  Pope  is  not  opinion  but  certitode 
amonz  Catholics,  though  there  may  be  many  discussions  a«  to 
whatlnd  of  what  quality  the  power  is:  that  is  to  say.  ^*^^f « 
it  be  properly  and  in  itself  of  a  temporal  kind,  or  whether  it  be 
not  nfiher  spiritual,  but  by  a  certain  necessary  consequence,  and 
in  order  to  spiritual  ends,  it  dispse  of  temporal  things,  f 
Bellarmine  states  his  own  opinion  in  these  words : 
"Temporal  Princes,  when  they  come  to  the  family  of  i^nrist, 
lose  neither  their  princely  power  nor  jurisdiction ;  but  they  become 
Bubiect  to  him  wbom  Christ  has  set  over  His  family  t»  be  gov- 
erned and  directed  by  him  in  those  things  which  lead  to  eternal 

Now,  from  these  passages  it  would  appar  iiiat  in  Bellarminc's 
iudirment  the  opinions  of  the  Canonists  and  the  Theologians 
iractically  came  to  one  and  the  same  thing,  though  their  language 
Wasdiflferent.  By  Temporal  Power  some  eariier  Cknonwte  m^ 
nerhaps  have  intended  a  power  temporal  m  itself;  but  the  laier 
Canonists  did  not  intend  more  than  a  Spinturi  powwr  over  tem- 
poral things :  which  the  Theologians  also  asserted.    But  this  use 

♦  Bellarmine,  De  PotestaU  Sbmni  i\>ntt/fcw,  cap.  i.  p.  848  A,  Cologne, 

^^^^t  IfrW.  cap.  iii.  p.  852  a.  t  J^-  caP-  i"-  P-  ^®  ^• 

14 


llLAflONS  Of  THB 

c»f  «h<i  word  Ump^ml  awmed  ^J^^.^^^l^^t^!^ 

bieoitf  k  the  ioans©  of  4li©  mwendewtwidiiigB  which  we  owy 
3  m  filtaoka  upon  the  Cktholio  Church.  I  can  the  more  retd- 
STbelieTe  the  good  faith  of  those  who  so  misconceive  it  because 

l^ean  remember  that  I  wan  misled  by  the  ^J^\^'^^\IZJS!aI 
Mm  For  instance,  the  CanoniatB  aflinii  that  the  whole  world  is 
Krrito^  Tthe  P^^^  Ponlf^).    But  they 

ri^CSswering  the  o^j^^^r^  ^^^^S^J'-^'.^^L^^tfX^ 
spiritually  in  the  territory  of  any  temporal  Pnnce,  »»«  «  ^  "Lf 
tlio  territory  of  another.  The  meaning  "evident  namehr,  that 
llie  Pontiff  has  universal  jurisdictipn  over  the  whole  world.  But 
tiiis  does  not  say  that  his  jurisdiction  is  tempowJ;^  I* jf  "»• 
mh  that  it  runs  into  all  the,  world.  It  merely  affims  that  it  w 
Bniversal;  and  the  same  writers  assert  that  m  itself  it  is  only 

^^Wrhivebeen  told  that  Bellamine's  book  was  put  upon  the 
Index.  But,  after  a  judicial  e«amination,  it  was  removed  bY 
Mder  of  the  Holy  See,  and  its  perfect  soundness  acknowledged. 
^uwei  lays  down  precisely  the  same  doctrine  as  Bellarmine. 

*  TS!Be"author8  who  teach  absolutely  tiiat  the  Pope  has  Su- 
preme Power,  and  that  temptyrah  in  the  whole  wOrld,  mean  this, 
•that  the  Pontiff  in  virtue  of  his  Spiritual  Fo^er  and  jurisdio- 
fHm.  is  superior  to  Kings  and  temporal  Princes,  so  as  to  direct 
ihem  in  the  use  of  the&  temporal  Power  m  order  to  Sptniual 
•Dds.'" 
He  then  goes  on :—  ,  ^vv^t,* 

"  For  thoui?h  they  sometimes  speak  indistinctly,  and  without 
■afiiient  clearness,  or  even  (impramu)  incorrectly-^because  the 
power  of  the  Pope  is  not  temporal  but  spiritual  which  contains 
Vder  itself  things  temporal,  and  is  exercised  about  them  tndt-- 
Sr%,  that  is.  forthe  sake  of  Spiritual  tlMngs--neyerttiele8s  they 
XT  make  this  sense  clear,  and  lay  down  their  distinctions 
either  expressly  or  virtually;  for  they  affirm  that  the  Pontiff  can 
do  some  thin^  imitrcc^y,  but  deny  that  he  can  do  them  dir 

'^iSt  if  the  Pope  had  Ummtal  power  properly  so  caUed,  he 
could  do  all  things  d^ecUy,  This  negative  proves  that  the  power 
of  which  they  spoke  was  only  Spiritual 

Suarez  further  says : —  ,  .  j.      ^     a  u:««*;«« 

"  Subiection  is  of  two  kinds—direct  and  indirect.    Subjection 

is  ealled  direct  when  it  is  within  the  end  and  limits  of  the  same 

power;  it  is  called  indirect  when  it  springs  ^om  direction  to  a 

liigher  end,  which  belongs  to  a  J^X^w  *»d,,'»<>'2i^''''!J  flKT*: 
The  proper  Civil  Power  in  itself  is  directly  ordained  for  the  fit- 
tinir  itato  and  temporal  happiness  of  the  human  commonwealtfi 
in  time  of  this  present  life;  and  therefore  the  power  itself  is 

t8u2el"k}eMio>i<fet  OrfAirftcaj,  torn,  xxiv.  lib.  iii.  c.  xxii.  2d  ed. 
Paris,  1869. 


SPIRITUAL  AHD   OITIL  POWBRS. 


lU 


called  temporal  The  Civil  Power,  therefore,  is  then  called  su- 
preme in  its  own  order  when  within  the  same,  and  in  respect  to 
Its  end,  the  ultimate  resolution  (of  power)  is  made  within  its 
own  sphere."  ..."  The  chief  ruler  is,  then,  subordinate  to 
no  superior  in  order  to  the  same  end  of  Civil  Government.  But, 
as  temporal  and  civil  happiness  are  related  to  that  which  is 
spiritufu  and  eternal,  it  may  happen  that  the  matter  of  Civil 
Government  must  be  otherwise  oroered  and  directed,  in  order  to 
spiritual  welfare,  than  the  Civil  policy  alone  seems  to  require. 
And  then,  though  the  temporal  Prince  and  his  power  do  not  di- 
rectly depend  in  their  acto  upon  any  other  power  in  the  same 
(t.  e.  the  temporal)  order,  which  also  regards  the  same  end  only, 
nevertheless  it  may  happen  that  it  needs  to  be  directed,  helped, 
and  corrected  in  the  matter  of  its  government  by  a  superior 
power,  which  governs  men  in  order  to  a  more  excellent  and  eter- 
nal end ;  and  then  this  dependence  is  called  indirect,  because 
that  higher  power  is  not  exercised  in  respect  to  temporal  things 
( per  se)  of  its  own  nature,  nor  for  its  own  sake,  but  indirectly, 
and  for  another  end."  * 

It  will  be  seen  here: —  .     . 

1.  That  the  superior  power  can  not  be  temporal,  or  its  jurisdic- 
tion vrould  be  direct. 

2.  That,  if  temporal,  it  would  not  be  of  a  higher,  but  of  the 
same  order. 

3.  That,  therefore,  the  claim  of  indirect  power  is  an  express 
exclusion  of  temporal  power,  properly  so  ealled,  from  the  spirit- 
ual supremacy  oi  the  Head  of  the  Church. 

Suarez  states,  but  rejects,  the  opinion  of  certain  early  Canon- 
ists and  Jurists  who  taught  that  the  power  of  the  Pontiff  over 
any  temporal  thing  was  also  temporal  in  itself.  He  then  states 
and  proves  that  this  indirect  power  is  Spiritual  only.  After 
speaking  of  the  power  of  the  Keys,  he  says : — 

•'  In  no  other  place  did  Christ  imply  that  He  gave  to  Peter  or 
to  the  Church  temporal  dominion,  or  a  proper  and  direct  royalty ; 
nor  does  Ecclesiastical  tradition  show  this,  but  rather  the  re- 
verse  "  ^ 

With  these  authorities  before  us,  there  can  be  little  difficulty 
in  explaining  the  texts  usually  quoted  by  adversaries,  who  desire 
to  fasten  on  the  Unam  Sanctum  and  upon  the  Catholic  Church  a 
claim  to  temporal  power,  that  is,  temporal  in  its  root  and  in  it- 
self 1       a     i>         -J 

The  passages  usually  quoted  from  Pope  Nicholas,  St.  Bernard, 
St.  Thomas,  Alvarez,  Hugo  of  St.  yictor,  St  Bonaventura,  Du- 
randus,  and  others,  are  fully  discussed  and  proved  by  BcUm*- 
mine  to  affirm  no  more  than  Spiritual  power ;  and  that  indirectly 
over  temporal  matters,  when  they  involve  the  Spiritual  end  of 
the  Church.} 

*  Suarez,  Defensio  Fidti,  4tc.  lib.  iii.  cap.  v.  sect.  2. 
t Suarez,  Defamo  Fidei,  &c.  lib.  iii.  cap.  v.  sect.  14. 
X  This  may  be  seen  in  his  CotUroverda  de  Sumrno  PontificCf  cap.  v.; 
and  in  Bianchi's  work,  Ddla  P^estciy  torn.  i.  p.  91,  lib.  i.  ch.  x.  xi. 


BBLATIOiro  or  TU 

IX.  I  hope  »««ffickn%topww.l2!5^Z^^ 

in  ifcw  Divine  oonstitotioii  ma4  connniwion  of  th«  Church,  ite  ex- 
mhm  m  tlie  world  depend,  on  certoin  monOand  material  oon- 
dUions.  by  wMoh  alone  He  exerciee  m  ^^^,V^^^,J^ ^i'S^ 
Vhk  aiiiill  be  shown  by  treating  te  inbjecta  raised  by  the    Ex- 
pMtulation ; "  •  naaehf,  the  depoeing  power,  and  the  «««  «VP«^ 
tcBl  force  or  penal  leg&lation  in  matters  of  reliffon.    J  ?«>!>«»  ""^ 
I  believe,  thiS^I  an  able  to  show  that  the  mofal  condition  of  the 
€hrislian  woiW  made  jnstiiable  in  other  ages  that  which  would 
be  uninstlfiablc  in  this ;  and  that  the  attempt  to  raiee  P^godioe, 
■aniieioii,  and  hostiUty  against  the  CTatholie  Ghureh  at  this^y 
tjJin  Enghind  by  these  topics,  is  an  act  essentially  unfl^*;  frj"* 
wliieb  a  roal  science  of  history  ought  to  have  preser^  Mr. 
Gladstone.    I  must  repeat  here  again  that  between  the  VatM»n 
Council  and  these  subjects  there  is  no  more  relation  than  be- 
tween  jarisprudence  and  Hie  equinox.    Some  fifteen  U>uncil8  ol 
the  Church,  of  which  two  are  General,  have  indeed  recognised 
•nd  acted  upon  the  suprcmiwjy  of  the  Spirit^sl,  authori^  o^^ 
Church  over  temporal  tilings;  but  the  Infallibi%  of  the  Koman 
Fontiff  is  one  thing,  his  supreme  judtcud  authority  m  another. 
And  the  Definition^f  Infallibility  by  the  Vatican  Cfouncil  has  m 
no  way,  by  so  much  as  a  jot  or  tittle,  changed  or  sffected  that 
which  was  infallibly  fixed  and  declared  before.    But,  "  1  ^^.  «^ 
nn  to  show,  even  infiillible  laws  cease  to  apply  when  the  subject 
Miller  is  wanting,  and  the  necessary  moral  conditions  are  passea 

I  must  acknowledge,  therefore,  that  the  following  words  fill  me 
vith  surprise.     Speaking  of  Dr.  Doyle  and  otfiers,  he  says :— 

"Answers  in  abundance  were  obtained,  tending  to  show  tnai 
As  doctrines  of  deposition  and  nersecution,  of  keep"^'?^^^ 
with  heretics,  and  of  universal  dominion,  were  obsolete  D^ona 

•This  passage  impUoitly  affirms  what  I  hope  ex^licitlv  to  prove. 
Sow  can  toS  bwjome  ohokU/hut  by  the  cessation  of  ^e  moral 
©onditions  which  require  or  justify  their  exercise?  How  eaii 
Isws,  the  exercise  of  whieh  is  required  by  the  pwmanent  pres- 
mm  of  the  same  moral  conditions  which  calj«?.**»««|»  "jj^®^^^^ 
ence,  become  obsolete  ?  I  pass  over  the  no  foith  with  heretics, 
which  is  am  example  of  the  injustice  which  P©™?  *"*• 
FtanpWei  I  should  have  thought  it  impossible  for  Mr.  Glsdstone 
mi  to  know  the  true  meaning  of  this  controversial  dirtortion: 
bot  I  am  willing  to  believe  that  he  did  not  know  it;  for  if  he 
had.  it  would  have  been  impossible  for  such  as^he  is  to  write  it 

The  moral  principles  on  which  Hm  exercise  of  supreme  TOwers 
and  rights  was  ju^&Oile  In  the  age  of  Bonifiice  VIU.  austo  no 
longer  m  the  nineteenth  century  in  Bnghind.  Let  no  one  cyn- 
Icafly  pretend  that  this  is  to  give  up  or  to  explain  away.    1  read 

the  other  day  these  words:—  4U««.— 

"The  Pope  has  sent  forth  his  prohibitions  and  his  anathemas 


*  Expostuiaiwn^  p.  26. 


f  Expoaulaiim^  p.  26. 


SPIRITITAIi  AXn  CIVIL  rOWBBS. 


165 


to  the  world,  and  the  world  has  disregarded  them.    The  fiuthful 
receive  them  with-eonventional  resnect,  and  then  hasten  to  assue 


bid  the  exercise  of  the  supreme  ludicialpower  of  the  Church  on 
such  a  civil  order  as  that  of  England.  When  it  was  df  facto  sub- 
ject to  the  Church,  England  had  by  its  own  free  will  adopted 
{he  kws  of  Christendom.  It  can  never  be  anin  sul^ject  to  such 
laws  except  on  the  same  condition— namely,  by  its  own  free  wilL 
TiU  then  the  highest  Uws  of  moralitjr  render  the  exercises  of  such 
Pon^cal  acts  in  Bnghind  impossible. 

Mr.  Gladstone  has  ealled  on  rius  IX.  to  renudiate  such  powers.t 
But  Pius  IX.  can  not  repudiate  powers  which  his  predecessors 
iustly  exercised,  without  implying  that  their  actions  were  unjust. 
He  need  not  repudiate  them  for  himself,  for  the  exerise  of  them 
18  impossible,  and,  if  physically  possible,  would  be  morally  im- 
possible, as  repugnant  to  all  e(juity,  and,  under  correoUon,  1 
will  say  to  naturd  justice.  The  infallible  witness  for  iustice,  and 
equity,  and  charity  among  men,  can  not  violate  these  laws  which- 
unerringly  govern  his  office.  •  *  xu.. 

X  The  command  of  our  Lord  to  the  Apostles :  Go  ye  into  the 
whoie  world  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature:  he  that 
believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not 
shall  be  condemned  "t— clearly  invests  the  Church  with  the  au- 
thority to  baptize  every  creature.  But  the  exercise  of  this  right 
was  suspended  upon  a  moral  condition.  It  conveyed  no  right  to 
baptize  any  man  against  his  wUl :  nor  vnthout  an  act  of  faith  on 
his  part  But  an  act  of  fiiith  is  a  spontaneous  and  voluntary  act 
of  sobmission,  both  of  intellect  and  will,  to  the  truth,  and  to  tiie 
teacher  who  delivers  it.  The  absolute  and  univers^  authority 
therefore  of  the  Church  to  baptize  depends  upon  tiie  free  and 
vohintary  aet  of  those  who  believe,  and,  throi^h  their  own  spon- 
taneous submission,  are  willing  to  be  baptized.  , .  ,  ..  . 
The  Church  so  regards  the  moral  conditions  on  which  iw  acts 
depend,  that  as  a  rufe  It  will  not  even  suffer  an  infant  to  be  bap- 
tised unless  at  least  one  of  the  parents  consents. 

In  like  manner  the  power  of  absolution,  which  has  no  limit  of 
time  or  of  subject,  can  be  exercised  only  upon  those  who  we  wil- 
ling. Confession  and  contrition,  both  voluntary  acts  of  the  peni- 
tent, are  absolutely  necessary  to  the  exercise  of  the  power  of  the 
'sLavs. 

This  principle  will  solve  many  questions  in  respect  to  the  Spir- 
itual authority  of  the  Church  over  the  Civil  State. 

First,  it  shows  that,  until  a  Christian  world  and  Christian  Killers 
existed,  there  was  no  subject  for  the  exercise  of  this  spiritual  au- 
thority of  judgment  and  correction.  Those  who  amuse  themselves 
by  asking  why  St  Peter  did  not  depose  Nero,  will  do  well  to  find 

♦  Time*,  Wednesday,  December  30,  1874,  in  leading  article  on 
^i^stuMion,  p.  26.  tSt  Mark  xvi.  15,  16. 


166 


JMMBMniHh4RMNIMpwwP     ^#i»       •■••^w 


f  ' 


oiit  whether  people  ue  liPikiiig  with  them  or  at  them.  Such 
qiMdtioiit  wre  usefbl  They  eompendiottily  show  that  the  ques- 
mom  does  not  underBtttiid  the  fint  principles  of  hii  subject  If  . 
he  will  find  out  why  fit  Peter  neither  bfiptiied  nor  absolved 
Hem,  he  will  have  found  out  why  he  did  not  depose  him.  Until  a 
Christian  world  existed  there  was  no  apia  fnaieria  for  the  supreme 
judieial  power  of  the  Church  in  temporal  thin|^.  Therefore  St 
jPaul  hddi  down  as  a  rule  of  law  that  he  had  nothing  to  do  in  judg- 
iu  those  that  were  without  the  unity  of  the  Church. 

But  when  a  Christian  world  came  into  existence,  the  Civil  so- 
ei#ty  of  man  became  subject  to  the  Spiritual  direction  of  the 
Church.  So  long,  however,  as  individuals  only  subjected  them- 
selves, one  by  one,  to  its  authority,  the  conditions  neeessaiy  for 
the  exercise  of  its  office  were  not  fully  present  The  Chureh 
guiiled  men,  one  by  one,  to  their  eternal  end ;  but  as  yet  the  col- 
lective society  of  nations  was  not  subject  to  its  guidance.  It  ia 
only  when  nations  and  kingdoms  become  socially  subject  to  the 
supreme  doctrinal  and  judicial  authori^  of  the  Church  that  the 
conditimia  of  its  exercise  are  verified.  When  the  senate  and  peo- 
ple of  the  Roman  Empire  were  only  half  Christian,  the  Church 
ilil]  refrained  from  acts  which  would  have  affected  the  whole 
body  of  the  State.  When  the  whole  had  become  Christian,  the 
whole  became  subject  to  the  Divine  Law,  of  which  the  Roman 
Pontiff  was  the  supreme  expositor  and  executive. 

It  would  be  endless  to  state  examples  in  detail.  I  will  take, 
therefore,  only  one  in  which  the  indirect  spiritual  power  of  the 
dmrch  over  the  temporal  State  is  abundantly  shown.  Take,  for 
instance,  the  whole  subject  of  Christian  Matrimony:  the  intro- 
duction of  the  Christian  law  of  the  unity  and  indissolubility  and 
iMsmnental  character  of  marriage;  the  tables  of  consanpinity 
and  of  aMnity ;  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Church  over  matrimonial 
cases.  This  action  of  the  Pontifical  law  upon  the  Imperial  hiw, 
and  the  gradual  conformity  of  the  Empire  to  the  Church,  exhibiti 
in  a  clear  and  complete  way  what  is  the  power  claimed  by  the 
Church  over  the  temporal  laws  of  Princes. 

The  Council  of  Trent  reserves  matrimonial  causes  to  the  Eccle- 
siastical Tribunals ;  and  in  the  Syllabus  the  proposition  is  con- 
ieamed  that  they  belong  to  the  Civil  lurisdiction* 

In  like  manner,  in  prohibiting  duels,  the  Council  declares  tem- 
poral penalties  agiiiift  not  only  the  principals,  but  those  also  who 
are  guilty  of  permitting  them,  t 

In  like  manner,  again,  the  Christian  law  of  faith  and  morals 
mssed  into  the  public  law  of  Christendom.  Then  arose  the 
Christian  jurisprudence,  in  which  the  Roman  Pontiff  was  rec- 
ngPliied  as  the  supreme  Judge  of  Princes  and  of  People,  with  a 
twoiiid  coercion :  spiritual  by  his  own  authorifrjr,  and  temporal 
by  the  secular  arm.  These  two  acted  as  one.  ExcommnnicKation 
and  deposition  were  so  united  in  the  jurisprudence  of  Christen- 
dom, #iat  he  who  pronounced  the  sentence  of  excommunication 

•Sees.  xxiv.  De  Ref.  can.  zii. 
fUmk  zzT.  cap.  xix. 


SPIRITOAL  IKD  CIVIL  POWERS. 


167 


pronounced  also  the  sentenct  of  deposition ;  as  before  the  repeal 
of  our  Test  Acts,  if  a  member  of  the  Church  of  England  became 
J^ttholic,  or  even  Nonconformist  he  was  ipso  facto  incapable  of 
flitting  in  Parliament  or  holding  office  of  State.  And  by  the  first 
of  Wuliam  IIL  the  heir  to  the  Crown,  if  he  become  Catholic,  or 
marry  a  Catholic,  ipso  facto  forfeits  the  succession.  Nothing  is 
more  certain  upon  the  foce  of  history,  and  no  one  has  proved 
more  abundantiRr  than  Dr.  DoUinger,  that  in  every  case  of  depo- 
sition, as  of  Philip  le  Bel,  Henry  IV.  of  Germany,  Frederic  U.. 
and  the  like,  the  sentence  of  the  Electors,  Princes,  States,  and 
people,  and  the  public  opinion  and  voice  of  nations,  had  already 
pronounced  sentence  of  rejection  upon  those  tjrrants  before  the 
Fontiffs  pronounced  the  sentence  ot  excommunication  and  depo- 
sition. It  was  only  by  the  faith  and  free  will  of  nations  that  they 
became  socially  subject  to  this  jurisprudence ;  it  was  by  their  free 
will  that  it  was  maintained  in  vigor;  and  it  was  in  conformity  with 
their  free  will  that  it  was  exercised  by  the  Pontiflfe.  Their  free 
■entence  preceded  the  Pontifical  sentence.  It  was  at  their  prayer, 
and  in  their  behalf,  that  it  was  pronounced.  The  moral  condition 
of  spontaneous  acceptance,  and  the  material  conditions  of  execu- 
tion, were  alike  present,  rendering  these  supreme  Pontifical  acts 
legitimate,  right  lawful,  wise,  and  salutary. 

XL  And  here  1  shaU  be  met  with  the  answer:  "You  iustify, 
then,  the  deposition  of  princes,  and  therefore  you  hold  that  the 
Pope  may  depose  Queen  Victoria."  Such,  I  am  sorry  to  say,  is 
the  argument  of  the  "  Expostulation ; "  for  if  it  be  not  why  was 
it  implied  ?  I  altogether  deny  the  argument,  or  inference,  or  call 
it  what  you  will.  I  affirm  that  the  deposition  of  Henry  IV.  and 
Frederic  II.  of  Germany  were  legitimate,  right,  and  lawful;  and 
I  affirm  that  a  deposition  of  Queen  Victoria  would  not  be  legiti- 
mate, nor  right  nor  lawful,  because  the  moral  conditions  which 
were  present  to  justify  tibe  deposition  of  the  Emperors  of  Ger- 
many are  absent  in  Ae  case  of  Queen  Victoria;  and  therefore 
such  an  act  could  not  be  done. 

This  is  not  a  mere  personal  opinion  of  my  own,  or  even  a  mere 
opinion  of  theologians.  What  I  have  affirmed  has  been  declared 
by  the  authority  of  Pius  VI.  In  a  letter  from  the  Congregation  of 
dardinals  of  the  College  of  Propaganda,  by  order  of  His  Holiness 
Pius  VL,  addressed  to  the  Roman  Catholic  Archbishops  of  Ire- 
land, dated  Rome,  June  23,  1791,  we  read  as  follows:— 

"  In  this  controversy  a  most  accurate  discrimination  should  be 
made  between  the  genuine  rights  of  the  Apostolical  See  and  those 
that  are  imputed  to  it  by  innovators  of  this  ace  for  the  purpose 
of  calumniating.  The  See  of  Rome  never  taught  that  faith  is  not 
to  be  kept  with  the  heterodox— that  an  oath  to  kings  separated 
from  Catholic  communion  can  be  violated— that  it  is  lawful  for 
the  Bishops  of  Rome  to  invade  their  temporal  rights  and  do- 
minions. We,  too,  consider  an  attempt  or  design  against  the  life 
of  kings  and  princes,  even  under  the  pretext  of  religion,  as  a 
horrid  and  detestable  crime."  ., 

I  may  add  that  this  passage  was  not  unknown  to  Dr.  UQllinger, 


im 


nUIMifi  W  TWM' 


dmrek  uid  lli« 


wlM  mokm  a  il  f .  51  i«  Mi  work  on  " 
fHiiiffliot." 

Bot  iMl  tnj  0B«  tliOiiM  mplf  tiittl  this  wm  Mid  when  CkOi- 
oKcB  w«ro  under  penal  laws,  and  with  a  view  to  blinding  the 
Bncliah  Goveninient,  I  will  add  that  no  one  baa  more  iranklj 
mS  forcibly  eipreeeed  this  than  Piua  IX.,  in  the  Tenr  text  of 
wikh  Mr.  eiadstone  has  qnoted  a  part  The  Hohr  IVither,  on 
W^  20, 1871,  thne  addresaed  a  Litetaiy  Soeietj  in  Rome:— 

"In  the  ▼arioly  of  sulijeeti  whieh  will  preeent  themselTee  to 

£n,  one  appears  to  me  of  great  importanee  at  this  time;  and 
It  i«,  to  defiMl  the  endearora  which  are  now  directed  to  fidsify 
the  Idea  of  the  InfiOMbility  of  the  Pope.  Among  all  other  errow, 
that  is  mapeiow  above  ill  which  wooM  attribute  (to  the  InfalU- 
bilitr  of  tfie  I«»e)  the  ritht  of  deposing  soveteigns,  and  of  ab- 
ioltitig  people  irom  the  obligation  of  allegiance. 

"  This  right,  without  doubt,  has  been  eieroised  by  the  Supreme 
Pontine  from  time  to  time  in  extreme  cases,  bol  it  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  Pontifical  Inftdlibility ;  neither  does  it  flow  from 
the  Inliaiibility,  but  from  the  authority  of  the  Pontiff. 

"Moreover,  the  exercise  of  this  right  in  those  ages  of  faith 
which  respected  in  the  Pope  that  which  he  is,  that  is  to  say,  the 
Supreme  Judse  of  Christendom,  and  recognised  the  benefit  of  his 
tribunal  in  the  great  contentions  of  peoples  and  of  sovereigns, 
was  freely  extended  (by  aid,  as  was  jast»  of  public  jurisprudenoej 
and  the  common  consent  of  nations)  to  the  gravest  interests  of 
Slilea  and  of  their  rulers."  , 

8(1  fa  Mr.  Gladstone  quoted  from  what  was  before  him.  Un- 
ivrlniiately,  he  appears  not  to  have  known  what  followed.    Pius 

IX.  went  on  to  say:—  ,.  .         .  .  .  ^ 

"But  altogether  difierent  are  the  conditions  of  the  present  time 
from  the  conditions  (of  those  ages);  and  malice  alone  can  oon- 
Ibund  things  so  diverse,  that  is  to  say,  the  Infidlible Judmiient  m 
respect  to  truths  of  Divine  Bevelation  with  the  right  which  the 
Popes  exercised  in  virtue  of  their  authority  when  the  common 
good  demanded  li  They  know  better  than  we,  and  every  body 
can  discern  the  reason  why  such  an  absurd  confusion  of  ideas  is 
stirred  up  at  this  time,  and  ip*f  hypf^thetical  eases  are  paraded 
ofwkkk  mo  wmn  ikimks.  It  is  because  every  pretext,  even  the 
moal  frivolous  and  furthest  firom  the  truth,  is  eagerly  caught  at, 
provided  it  be  of  a  kind  to  give  us  annoyance,  and  to  excite  civil 
rulers  against  the  Church. 

"Some  would  have  me  Interpret  and  explain  even  more  fully 
Hie  Definition  of  the  Council  ^    , 

"  1  win  not  do  it  It  is  clear  in  itself,  and  has  no  need  of  other 
oomments  and  explanations.  Whosoever  reads  Aat  Deeree  with 
a  dispassionate  mind  has  Its  true  sense  easily  and  obviously  beforu' 

iiin.  • 

Now,  the  Holy  Father  in  these  words  has  abundantly  shown 
tiro  things:  fliit,  that  they  who  connect  Infallibility  with  the 
Bepoiing Power  are  talking  of  what  they  do  not  understand; 

Jtmitf^ta^Hi^m '  " 

•Mmmi  di  Pio  Nmo,  July  20, 1871,  p.  203,  Rome,  1872. 


SPIRITUAL  AKD  OITIL  POWERS. 


im 


1,  secondly,  that  the  moral  conditions  which  justified  and  de- 
manded the  deposition  of  tyrannical  Princes,  when  the  mediaeval 
world  was  both  Christian  and  Catholic,  have  absolutely  ceased  to 
exist,  now  that  the  world  has  ceased'  to  be  Catholic,  and  has 
ceased  to  be  even  Christian.  It  has  withdrawn  itself  socially  as 
a  whole,  and  in  the  public  life  of  nations,  from  the  unity  and 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Christian  Church.  In  this  it  differs  al- 
togetlier  from  the  mediaeval  world.  And  it  differs  also  from  the 
ancient  world.  For,  the  ancient  world  had  never  yet  believed 
the  fiuth;  the  modem  world  has  believed,  but  ^len  from  it^ 
fiuth.  The  ancient  world  was  without  the  unity  of  the  Christian 
Church  de  faeio  et  de  jure.  The  modern  world  is  without  de 
facto ;  and  this  has  chanj^ed  all  the  moral  conditions  of  the 
subject  The  Church  never,  indeed,  loses  its  jurisdiction  in  ra- 
dice  over  the  baptized,  because  the  character  of  baptism  is  in- 
dellible;  but  unless  the  moral  conditions  Justifying  its  exercise 
be  present,  it  never  puts  it  forth.  As  Mr.  Ghuistone  has  cited  the 
example  of  Queen  EliKabeth,  implying  that  he  sees  no  difference 
between  Queen  Elizabeth  and  Queen  Victoria,  I  will  add  that 
Queen  Elizabeth  was  baptized  a  Catholic ;  that  she  was  crowned 
as  a  Catholic;  that  she  received  Holy  Communion  in  the  High 
Mass  of  her  consecration  as  a  Catholic ;  that  she  was  both  dejure 
and  de  facto  a  subject  of  the  Catholic  Church;  that  the  majority 
of  the  people  of  England  were  still  Catholic.  What  one  of  ail 
these  conditions  is  present  in  the  case  which  I  refuse  to  put  in 
parallel?  The  Enj^^lish  Monarchy  has  been  withdrawn  fur  three 
centuries  from  the  Catholic  Church;  the  English  people  are 
wholly  separate;  the  Legislation  of  England  has  effaced  every 
trace  of  the  jurisprudence  which  rendered  the  Pontifical  acts  of 
Si  Gregory  VII.  and  Innocent  IV.  legitimate,  just,  and  right 
The  public  laws  of  England  explicitly  reject  and  exclude  the  first 
principles  of  that  ancient  Christian  and  Catholic  jurisprudence. 
Not  only  is  every  moral  condition  which  could  justify  such  an 
act  absent,  but  every  moral  condition  which  would  render  such 
an  act  unjustifiable,  as  it  would  seem  to  me,  is  present.^  Thia 
is  a  treatment  of  history  which  is  not  scientific,  but  shallow ;  and 
a  dangerous  use  of  inflammatory  rhetoric,  when  every  calm  dic- 
tate of  prudence  and  of  justice  ought  to  forbid  its  indulgence. 
"  The  historic  spirit,"  f  commended  in  the  "  Expostulation," 
would  have  led  to  such  a  treatment  of  this  question  as  Mr.  Free- 
man wisely  recommends. 

"  The  cause  of  all  this  diversity  and  controversy— a  diversity  and 
controversy  most  fatal  to  historic  truth — is  to  be  traced  to  the 
unhappy  mistake  of  looking  at  the  men  of  the  twelfth  century 
with  the  eyes  of  the  nineteenth ;  and  still  more  of  hoping  to  ex- 
tract something  from  the  events  of  the  twelfth  century  to  do 
service  in  the  controversies  of  the  nineteenth."  J 

XII.  For  the  same  reasons  I  deplore  the  haste,  I  must  say  the 

♦Appendix  B.  f  ExposttikUwnf  p.  14. 

t  Freeman's  Historical  Estc^  "  St  Thomas  of  Canterbury  and  hia 
Biographers,"  p.  80. 

15 


170 


BELAIIOXS  OF  THE 


passion,  which  carried  away  no  large  a  mind  to  affirm  or  to  im- 
Pj  tlial  the  Church  at  this  daj  wonld.  if  she  could,  «»e  torture. 
and  fofoe,  and  coercion  in  matters  of  religious  belief.    1  am  well 
aware  that  men  of  a  mind  and  calibre  as  far  remoTcd  from  Mr. 
Gladstone   as  almost  to  constituto  a  different  species,  have  at 
times  endeavored  to  raise  suspicion  and  animosity  against  Cath- 
olics,   by    affirming  that  if  they  became  the  majority  in  this 
country — &  danger  certainly  not   proximate — they   would    use 
their  power  to  compel  men  to  conform  to  the  Catholic  faith.    In 
the  year  1830  the  Catholics  of  Belgium  were  in  a  vast  majority, 
but  they  did  not  use  their  political  power  to  constrain  the  faith 
or  conseienee  of  any  man.    The  "Four  Liberties"  of  Belgium 
were  tho  work  of  Catholics.    This  is  the  moat  recent  example  of 
what  Catholics  would  do  if  they  were  in  possession  of  power. 
Bat  there  is  one  more  ancient  and  more  homel:^  for  us  Englisn- 
inen.    It  is  found  at  a  date  when  the  old  traditions  of  the  Caili- 
oie  Church  were  still  vigorous  in  the  minds  of  men.    It  will 
therefore  show  that  in  this  at  least  we  owe  nothing  to  modem 
progress,  nor  to  the  indifference  of  liberalism.    If  the  modern 
spirit  had  any  share  in  producing  the  Constitution  in  Belgium, 
it  certainly  had  no  share  in  producing  the  Constitution  of  Mary- 
land.   Lord  Baltimore,  who  had  been  Secretary  of  State  under 
James  I.,  in  1633,  emigrated  to  the  American  Plantations,  where, 
tlifough  Lord  Strafford's  influence,  he  had  obtained  a  grant  of 
lund.    He  was  acctimpanied  by  men  of  all  minds,  who  agreed 
(^ieiy  in  the  one  desire  to  leave  behind  them  the  miserable  re- 
ligious conflicts  which  then  tormented  England.    They  named 
their  new  country  Maryland,  and  there  they  settled.    The  oath 
of  the  Governor  was  in  these  terms :  "  I  will  not,  by  myself  or 
any  other,  directly  or  indirectly,  molest  any  person  professing 
to  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  for  or  in  respect  of  religion."    Lord 
Baltimore  invited  the  Puritans  of  Massachusetts,  who,  like  him- 
self, had  renounced  their  country  for  conscience'  sake,  to  come 
into  Maryland.    In  1649,  when  active  persecution  had  sprung  up 
again  in  England,  the  Council  of  Maryland,  on  the  21st  of  April, 
passed  this  Statute :  "And  whereas  the  forcing  of  the  conscience 
mmattera  of  religion  hath  frequently  fallen  out  to  be  of  danger- 
ous aoiifequence  m  the  Commonwealth  where  it  has  been  nrao- 
tloed,  and  for  the  more  quiet  and  peaceable  government  or  the 
Province,  and  the   better   to  preserve  mutual  love  and  amity 
among  the  inhabitants,  no  person  within  the  Province  professing 
to  believe  in  Jesus  Christ  shall  be  anyways  troubled,  molested, 
or  discountenanced  for  his  or  her  religion,  or  in  the  free  exercise 
thereof."*    The  Episcopalians  and  Protestants  fled  from  Virginia 
4nto   Maryland.    Such  was   the  Commonwealth  founded  by  a 
Catholic  upon  the  broad  moral  law  I  have  hero  laid  down — ^that 
faith  is  an  act  of  the  will,  and  that  to  force  men  to  profess  what 
they  do  not  believe  is  contrary  to  the  Uw  of  God,  and  that  to 
generate  faith  by  force  is  morally  impossible.    It  waa  by  convio- 

» Bancroft's  Msi&r^  o/  ike  Untied  SMmt  vol.  i.  pp..  238,  286,  806, 

etc* 


SPIRITtJAL  AXD  CIVIL  POWERS. 


171 


iskm  of  the  reason  and  by  persuasion  of  the  will  that  the  world- 
wide unity  of  faith  and  communion  were  slowly  built  up  among 
the  nations.  When  once  shattered,  nothing  but  conviction  and 
persuasion  can  restore  it.  Lord  Baltimore  was  surrounded  by  a 
multitude  scattered  by  the  great  wreck  of  the  Tudor  persecu- 
tions. He  knew  that  Ood  alone  could  build  them  up  again  into 
unity;  but  that  the  equity  of  charity  might  enable  them  to  pro- 
tect and  to  help  esich  other,  and  to  promote  the  common  weal. 

I  can  not  refrain  from  continuing  the  history.  The  Puritan 
Commonwealth  in  England  brought  on  a  Puritan  revolution  in 
Maryland.  They  acknowledged  Cromwell,  and  disfranchised  the 
whole  Catholic  population.  "Liberty  of  conscience"  waa  de- 
elared,  but  to  the  exclusion  of  "  Popery,  Prelacy,  and  licentious- 
ness of  opinion."  Penal  laws  came,  of  course.  Quakers  in 
Massachusetts,  for  the  first  offense,  lost  one  ear;  for  the  second, 
the  other;  for  the  third,  had  their  tongue  seared  with  a  red-hot 
iron.  Women  were  whipped,  and  men  were  hanged,  for  religion. 
If  Catholics  were  in  power  to-morrow  in  England,  not  a  penal  law 
would  be  proposed,  nor  the  shadow  of  constraint  be  put  upon  the 
faith  of  any  man.  We  would  that  all  men  fully  believed  the 
truth ;  but  a  forced  faith  is  a  hypocrisy  hateful  to  God  and  man. 
If  Catholics  were  in  power  to-morrow,  not  only  would  there  be 
no  penal  laws  of  constraint,  but  no  penal  laws  of  privation.  If 
the  Ionian  Islands  had  elected,  some  years  ago,  to  attach  them- 
selves to  the  Sjjvereignty  of  Pius  IX.,  the  status  of  the  Greek 
Church  separate  from  Catholic  Unity  would  have  been  tolerated 
and  respected.  Their  Churches,  their  public  worship,  their 
Clergy,  and  their  religious  rites  would  have  been  left  free  as  be- 
fore. They  were  found  in  possession,  which  was  confirmed  by 
the  tradition  of  centuries;  tney  had  acquired  Civil  rights,  which 
enter  into  the  laws  of  political  justice,  and  as  such  would  have 
been  protected  from  all  molestation.* 

I  have  drawn  this  out,  because  a  question  absolutely  chimerical 
has  been  raised  to  disturb  the  confidence  of  the  English  people 
in  their  Catholic  fellow-countrymen.  And  I  have  given  the  rea- 
son and  the  principle  upon  which,  if  the  Catholics  were  to-mor- 
row the  "  Imperial  race"  in  these  Kingdoms,  they  would  not  use 
political  power  to  molest  the  divided  and  hereditary  religious 
state  of  our  people.  We  should  not  shut  one  of  their  Churches, 
or  Colleges,  or  Schools.  They  would  have  the  same  liberties  we 
enjoy  aa  a  minority.  I  hope  the  Nonconformists  of  England  are 
prepared  to  say  the  same.    As  we  are  in  days  when  some  are 

♦Our  older  writers,  such  as  Bellarmine  and  Suarez,  when  treating 
of  this  subject,  had  before  their  eyes  a  generation  of  men  who  all  had 
been  in  the  unity  of  the  faith.  Their  separation  therefore  was  for- 
mal and  willful.  Their  separation  from  the  unity  of  the  Church  did 
not  release  the  conscience  from  its  juri-jdiction.  But  if  Bellarmine 
and  Suarez  were  living  at  this  day,  they  would  have  to  treat  of  a 

auestion  differing  in  all  its  moral  conditions.  What  I  have  here  laid 
own  is  founded  upon  the  principles  they  taught,  applied  to  our 
times.  Cardinal  Tarquini,  in  treating  the  same  matter,  has  dealt 
with  it  as  it  has  been  treated  here.— /wrw  Eccl.  Fubl.  ImtittaioneSt  p.  78. 


AOGBEiMlONS  Of  THE  CIVIL  POWER. 


AOORBSSIOHS  OF  THE  CI7IL   POWEB. 


173 


II 


iiiviled,*'  and  aome  are  " ©xpcted/*  and  some  are  "required " 
to  speak  out,  I  will  ask  my  fellow'ooiiiitrjmeii  of  all  reUgious 
ki&os  to  be  as  frank  as  I  am. 

XIII.  I  have  now  given,  I  hope,  sufficient  evidence  to  prove  the 
aiserlion  made  in  the  second  letter  quoted  at  the  outset  of  these 
pages;  namely: — 

'•That  the  relations  of  the  Catholic  Church  to  the  Civil  Powers 
have  been  fixed  immutably  from  the  beginning,  because  they 
arise  out  of  the  DiYine  constitution  of  the  Churoh,  and  out  of 
the  civil  society  of  the  natural  order." 

And  we  have  also  seen  how  fiur  from  the  truth  are  the  coiii* 
dent  assertions  put  forward  latelr,  that  the  Church  ascribes  to  its 
head  Supreme  Temporal  as  well  as  Supreme  Spiritual  Power.* 

Fmlher,  we  have  seen  with  what  strange  want  of  reflection 
aiid  of  depth  the  Pontifical  acts  of  the  old  Catholic  world  are 
liMisferrea  ptr  galium  to  a  world  which  has  ceased,  in  its  public 
life  and  laws,  to  be  Catholic,  I  may  altfost  say,  to  be  even  Chris- 

tian* 

Finally,  I  have  shown,  I  hope,  what  are  the  relations  of  the 
Chnrch  to  the  Civil  Powers  of  the  world;  and  I  have  given  evi- 
denae  to  prove  that  those  relations  have  been  fixed  from  the  be< 

finning  by  reason  of  the  Divine  constitution  of  the  Church,  and 
ave  been  declared  by  Councils,  not  only  before  the  Council  of 
the  Vatican,  but  before  the  Council  of  Trent;  and,  therefore,  that 
to  charge  upon  the  Vatican  Couneil  a  change  in  these  relations 
it  not  ®nlj  an  assertion  without  proof,  but  an  assertion  contrary 
t^'  iifloriiMd  fact 


ill.    AgGKESJSIONS  of  TBI  CiVII,  POWBB, 

Bfr.  Gladstone  says: — 

**  II  is  the  peculiarity  of  Roman  theoloflnr  that,  by  thrust- 
ing itself  into  the  temporal  domain,  it  naturally,  and  even  neces- 
sarily, comes  to  be  a  frequent  theme  of  political  discussion.  To 
quiet-minded  Boman  Catholics  it  must  be  a  subject  of  infinite 
unnoyance  that  their  relicion  is  on  this  ground  more  than  any 
ntlier  the  subject  of  criticism;  more  than  any  other  (he  oeoasion 
of  iMHiiiiits  with  the  State  and  of  eivil  disquietude.  I  feel  sin- 
oerely  how  much  hardship  their  case  entails,  bitt  this  hardship  is 
brought  upon  them  altogether  by  the  conduct  of  the  authoritiea 
of  their  own  Church."  f  . ,     , 

His  pamphlet  from  beginning  to  end  bristles  with  the  same 
aceuMons  against  the  Catholic  Church.  His  whole  ar^ment 
might  be  entitled,  "  Reasons  to  show  that  in  all  Conflicts  the 
Christian  Chnrch  is  always  in  the  wrong,  and  the  Civil  Stote  al- 
wayt  in  the  right;  "  or,  "On  the  outrageous  Claims  X  ^^^  "-^~ 
orbitances  of  Papal  Assumptions,}  contrasted  with  the  Inno- 
cence and  Infallibility  of  Civil  States."    This  seems  to  me  to  be 


history  read  upside  down;  and  not  history  only,  but  also  Chris- 
tianity. I  can  hardly  persuade  myself  that  Mr.  Gladstone  would 
contend  that  even  in  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon  *  St.  Thomas 
of  Canterbury  was  the  aggressor,  and  Henry  II.  was  within  the 
law ;  or  that  either  the  Pope  or  Archbishop  Langton  began  the 
conflict  with  the  "  Papal  minion  John ;  "  or,  again,  that  in  the 
question  of  Investitures  and  Ecclesiastical  Simony,  the  Emperors 
of  Germany  were  on  the  side  of  law  and  justice,  and  St.  Greg- 
ory VII.  and  Innocent  III.  were  aggjressors.  And  yet  all  this  is 
necessary  to  his  argument.  If  he  is  not  prepared  to  maintain 
this,  the  whole  foundation  is  gone.  But  I  ao  not  know  how  any 
man  who  believes  in  the  Divine  office  of  the  Christian  Church 
can  maintain  such  a  thesis.  And  I  have  always  believed  that 
Mr.  Gladstone  does  so  believe  the  Christian  Church  to  have  a 
Divine  office,  which,  within  some  limit  at  least,  is  independent  of 
bU  human  authority. 

But  as  the  contention  before  us  is  not  of  the  past  so  much  as 
of  the  present,  I  will  come  to  the  facts  of  the  days  in  which  we 
live. 

My  third  proposition,  then,  is,  that  any  collisions  now  existing 
between  the  Catholic  Church,  and  the  States  of  Europe  have  been 
brought  on  by  changes,  not  on  the  part  of  the  Church,  much  less 
of  the  Vatican  Council,  but  on  the  part  of  the  Civil  Powers,  and 
that  by  reason  of  a  systematic  conspiracy  a^inst  the  Holy  See. 
No  one  will  ascribe  to  the  Vatican  Councu  the  Revolution  in 
Italy,  the  seizure  of  Rome  in  1848,  the  invasion  of  the  Roman 
State  in  1860,  the  attacks  of  Garibaldi  a^inst  Rome,  ending  with 
Mentana.  And  yet  there  are  people  who  ascribe  to  the  Vatican 
Council  the  breach  at  the  Porta  Pia,  and  the  entry  of  the  Italians 
into  Rome.  Such  reasoners  are  proof  against  history,  chronology, 
and  logic.  If  anybody  will  persist  in  saying  that  the  two  and 
twenty  years  of  aggression  against  the  Holy  See,  from  1848  to 
1870.  were  caused  %  Pius  IX.,  I  must  address  myself  to  other 
men.  That  Pius  IX.  has  been  in  collision  with  those  who  at- 
tacked him  is  true  enough.  So  is  every  man  who  defends  his  own 
house.  Who,  I  ask,  be^n  the  fray?  From  the  Siccardi  laws 
down  to  the  laws  of  the  Guarantees,  who  was  the  aggressor  ?  But 
where  the  Pope  is  concerned  locic  seems  to  fail  even  in  reasonable 
men.  The  other  day  Prince  Von  Bismarck  told  the  Catholics  of 
the  Reichstag  that  they  were  accomplices  of  Kulmann,  and  there- 
fore, as  he  implied,  his  assassins.    Moreover,  he  affirmed  that  the 


*  Apoafutoliofi,  €te.f  p.  27. 
t  Falifiww  Decrmi,  p.  9. 


I  Jfrtd.  p.  11. 


fJMI.  p.  26. 


♦Mr.  Gladstone  says, upon  what  evidence  I  do  not  know,  "The 
Constitutions  of  Clarendon,  cursed  from  the  Papal  Throne,  were  the 
work  of  the  English  Bishops."*  St.  Thomas  himself  says  that "  Rich- 
aid  de  Luci  and  Jocelin  de  Balliol,  the  abettors  of  the  Royal  tyr- 
anny, were  the  fabricators  of  those  heretical  pravitie8.'*t  Herbert 
of  Bosham,  who  was  present  at  Clarendon,  says  that  they  were 
the  work  of  "certain  nobles  (proceres)  or  chief-men  of  the  king- 
dom." t  The  Bishops  were  indeed  terrified  into  submitting  to  them, 
hut  the  Constitutions  were  in  no  sense  their  work. 

*  VaUcan  Deertea.pp.  87, 58.      fWp.  9t.  ITbofmr,  torn.  ill.  p.  12,  ed.  Giles,  IMS, 
I  VUa  8t.  Thomett  torn.  vil.  p.  115,  ed.  Giles. 


I 


ATOR18SI0XS  QW  THB  CITIL  WWML 


vtr  of  Franc©  afsainift  Prassia  mm  forced  on  th©  Freiicli  Bm- 
iMiior  by  the  Pop©  and  the  Jesuita.  How  proTidentially,  then, 
though  altogether  fortuitously,  no  doubt,  had  Prussia  been  for 
three  years  massing  its  munitions  of  war  and  putting  France  m 
the  wrong  by  intngues  in  Spain,  and  fables  from  Ems.  Ncver- 
th©l©«8,  all  these  things  arc  believed.  Prince  \  on  Bismarck  ha« 
■aid  them.     But  surely  they  belong  to  the  Arabian  Nights. 

Mow  I  have  already  shown  that,  before  the  Vatican  Council  a»- 
mmhM,  there  was  an  opposition  systematically  organized  to  re- 
sist it.  It  was  begun  by  certain  Professors  at  Munich,  lb© 
Munich  Gov ©mment  lent  itself  ns  an  agent  to  Dr.  Dollinger,  and 
©ndeavor©d  to  draw  the  other  Governments  of  Europe  into  «- com- 
Mii©d  attempt  to  hinder  or  to  intimidate  the  Council  And  this 
was  done  on  the  plea  that  the  Council  would  not  be  free.  I  well 
remember  that  at  one  time  we  were  told  in  Ronie,  that  if  the 
Council  persevered  with  the  Deanition  of  the  Infallibility,  tli© 
French  troops  would  be  withdrawn.  That  is  to  say,  tliat  the  Gan- 
baldians  would  be  let  in  to  make  short  work  of  the  Definition. 
It  was  said  that  the  presence  of  the  French  troops  was  an  undu© 
pressure  on  the  freedom  of  the  Council,  and  that  their  departure 
^  essential  to  its  true  liberty.  There  was  a  grim  irony  amount. 
ins  to  humor  in  this  solicitude  for  the  liberty  of  the  Council. 

I  wil  now  trace  out  more  fully  the  history  of  this  conspiracy,  m 
order  to  put  beyond  question  my  assertion  that  the  plan  of  attack 
was  prepared  before  the  Council  met,  and  that  the  Falck  Lawi 
sr©  a  deliberate  change  made  by  the  Civil  Power  of  Prussia,  th© 
■latus  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  Germany  being  stiU  unchanged. 

J  will  her©  ask  leave  to  repeat  what  I  stated  two  years  ago: 

"In  the  year  1869  it  was  already  believed  that  th©  Bavarian 
Government,  through  Prince  Hohenlohe,  had  begun  a  systematic 
agitation  against  the  Council.  It  was  known  that  he  had  ad- 
dwiised  a  circular  note  to  the  European  Governments.  But  th© 
text  of  that  note  was  not,  so  far  as  I  know,  ever  made  public. 

I  ani  able  now  to  give  the  text  in  full.  It  affords  abundant  proof 
of  til©  assertion  here  made,  that  a  deliberate  conspiracy  against 
the  Council  was  planned  with  groat  artiice  and  spcciousness  of 
matter  and  of  language.  Moreover,  the  date  of  this  documcnl 
■hows  how  long  befor©  th©  opening  of  the  Council  this  opposition 
was  commenced.  The  Council  was  opened  on  December  8,  1869. 
Prince  Hohcnlohe's  note  is  dated  on  th©  9th  of  the  April  preced- 
ing, that  is  to  say,  about  eight  months  befor©  th©  Council  began. 

II  urns  as  follows : —  i.     n        -i 

*•  *  Monsieur,— It  b©«iiis  to  b©  certain  that  th©  Council  con- 
¥okod  by  His  Holin©88  Pop©  Pius  IX.  will  meet  in  the  month  of 
Beoember  next  Th©  number  of  prelates  who  will  attend  it  from 
all  parts  of  th©  world  will  b©  much  greater  than  at  any  former 
Counca  This  fact  alon©  will  help  to  give  to  its  decrees  a  great 
authority,  such  as  belongs  to  an  CEcumenical  Council.  Taking 
this  circumstance  into  consideration,  it  appears  to  me  indispenMr 
bl©  for  every  government  to  give  it  their  attention,  and  it  is  with 
-  -  ^  ^1^^  n^i  J  j^jjj  about  to  address  to  jou  som©  observations. 
"It  is  not  probable  that  th©  Council  will  occupy  itself  only 


AOORBSSIOKS  OF  THB  CIVIL  POWER. 


175 


with  doctrines  appertaining  to  pure  theology;  there  does  not  ex- 
ist at  this  moment  any  problem  of  this  nature  which  requires  a 
conciliar  solution.  The  only  dogmatic  thesis  which  Rome  would 
wish  to  have  decided  by  the  Council,  and  which  the  Jesuits  in 
Italy  and  Germany  are  now  agitating,  is  the  question  of  the  Infal- 
libility of  the  Pope.  It  is  evident  that  this  pretension,  elevated 
into  a  dogma,  would  go  far  beyond  the  purely  spiritual  sphere, 
and  would  become  a  question  eminently  political,  as  raising  the 
power  of  the  Sovereign  Pontiff,  even  in  temporal  matters,  over  all 
the  princes  and  peoples  of  Christendom.  This  doctrine,  therefore, 
is  of  such  a  nature  as  to  arouse  the  attention  of  all  those  Govern- 
ments who  rule  over  Catholic  subjects. 

'"There  is  a  circumstance  which  increases  still  more  the  gravity 
of  the  situation.  I  learn  that  among  the  commissions  delegated 
to  prepare  matter,  which  later  on  is  to  be  submitted  to  the  delib- 
erations of  the  Council,  there  is  one  which  is  occupied  only  on 
mixed  questions,  affecting  equally  international  law,  politics,  and 
canon  law.  All  these  preparations  justify  our  believing  that  it  is 
the  fixed  intention  of  tne  Holy  See,  or  at  least  of  a  party  at  pres- 
ent powerful  in  Rome,  to  promulgate  through  the  Council  a  series 
of  decrees  upon  questions  which  are  rather  political  than  eccle- 
siastical. Add  to  this  that  the  Cimlth  CattoUca — a  periodical 
conducted  by  the  Jesuits,  and  bearing  an  oflScial  character  through 
th©  brief  of  the  Holy  Father — ^has  just  demanded  that  the  Council 
shall  transform  into  conciliar  decrees  the  condemnations  of  the 
Syllabus,  published  on  December  8,  1864.  Now,  the  articles  of 
this  encyclical  bein^  directed  against  principles  which  are  the 
base  of  modern  public  life,  such  as  we  find  it  among  all  civilized 
nations,  it  follows  that  Governments  are  under  the  necessity  of 
asking  themselves  if  it  is  not  their  duty  to  invite  the  serious  con- 
sideration both  of  the  Bishops  who  are  their  subjects,  and  of  the 
future  Council,  to  the  sad  consequences  of  such  a  premeditated 
and  systematic  overturning  of  the  present  relations  between 
Churcn  and  State.  It  can  not,  indeed,  be  denied,  that  it  is  a  mat- 
ter of  urgency  for  Governments  to  combine,  for  the  purpose  of 
protesting,  either  through  their  agents  in  Rome,  or  in  some  other 
way,  against  all  decisions  which  the  Council  may  promulgate 
without  th©  concurrence  of  the  representatives  oi  the  secular 
power,  in  questions  which  are  at  the  same  time  of  a  political  and 
religious  nature. 

"  *  I  thought  that  the  initiative  in  so  important  a  matter  should 
be  taken  by  one  of  the  great  Powers ;  but  not  having  as  yet  re- 
ceived any  communication  on  this  subject,  I  ha^  thought  it  nec- 
essary to  seek  for  a  mutual  understanding  which  will  protect  our 
common  interests,  and  that  without  delay,  seeing  that  the  interval 
between  this  time  and  the  meetinj^  of  tne  Council  is  so  short  I 
tiierefore  desire  you  to  submit  this  matter  to  the  Government  to 
which  you  are  accredited,  and  to  ascertain  the  views  and  inten- 
tions of  the  Court  of  *  *  *  in  respect  to  the  course  which  it 
deems  advisable  to  follow.  Tou  will  submit,  for  the  approbation 
of  M,  ♦  *  *,  the  question  whether  it  would  not  be  advisable  to 
fix  beforehand  the  measures  to  be  taken,  if  not  jointly,  at  least 


lis 


AmiianoNS  of  ihi  crrii.  fowmb. 


lintiMBj.  in  order  to  mllghUn  the  Holy  See  m  to  the  attitoda 
which  the  Governments  of  the  Continent  will  assume  in  reference 
to  the  Ecumenical  Conncil;  or  whether  conferences  composed  of 
WfftMiitatives  of  the  States  concerned  would  not  be  considered 
«g  the  b«8t  means  to  bring  about  an  understanding  between  thou 

Clover nments.  .  i    l   •»#• 

"  *  I  authorise  you  to  leave  a  copy  of  this  dispatch  with  the  Min- 
iater  for  Foreign  Affairs  at  *  ♦  *  ,  if  he  desires  it;  and  I  wish 
yoii  to  inform  me  as  early  as  possible  of  the  manner  m  whica 
tlilt  oommttnicatio&  may  be  received. 

"•I  have  th«  honor,  etc., 

"  '  HOHENLOBK. 

" '  Jfiiiiicft.  JjprtI  9, 1869.' '* 

No  me  oowM  fail  to  see  that  this  Circular  had  not  Prince  Ho- 
henlohe  for  its  author.  We  shaU  hereafter  traoe  it  to  its  legiti- 
mate origin.  ,  ^,.  ^  ^  ^^ 

•'The  indiction  of  the  Council  was  no  sooner  published  than 
the  well-known  volume  called  Jmns  appeared.  It  was  said  to  he 
the  work  of  many  hands,  and  of  various  nations — of  two  at  least 
Tift  chief  object  of  its  animosity  was  Rome,  and  its  detailed  hoe- 
iiitr  was  levelled  against  the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff 
tui  tlio  SyUabus.  The  book  was  elaborately  acrimonious  and  ex- 
tiffaffiiitiy  iMolent  against  Home.  Its  avowed  aim  waa  to  rouse 
tlM  Civil  Governments  against  the  Council  The  Sovereign  Pon- 
tiff had,  with  great  wisdom  and  justice,  dealt  with  the  Govern- 
ments of  Europe  on  the  ground  chosen  by  themselves.  They  had 
renounced  the  Catholic  relations  of  union  hitherto  subsisting  be- 
twfl«ii  the  Civil  and  Spiritual  Powers.  Pius  IX.  took  them  at 
tli«if  word.  He  convened  the  Spiritual  Legislature  of  the  Church ; 
he  did  not  invite  those  who  have  gloried  in  their  separation  from 
it  This,  again,  sharpened  the  jealously  and  suspicion  of  the 
Governments.  At  this  time  came  forth  certain  publications—to 
whieh  I  will  not  more  explicitly  refer— avowedly  intended  to  ex- 
cite the  Civil  Powers  to  active  opposition. 

"About  the  month  of  September,  1869,  as  I  have  already  said, 
a  document  containing  five  Questions  was  proposed  by  the  Bava- 
fian  Government  to  the  Theological  Faculty  at  Munich,  ^o  one 
Muld  for  a  moment  doubt  by  what  hand  those  interrogatories  also 
were  framed ;  they  were  intended  to  elicit  the  answer,  that  the 
action  of  the  Council,  if  it  were  to  define  the  Infallibility  of  the 
Boman  Pontiff,  would  be  irreconcilable  not  only  with  Catholic 
dootrine,  but  wi^  the  secirity  of  Civil  Governments.  In  due 
tiaie  tiM  answers  appeared,  leaving  no  doubt  that  both  the  (jiiet- 
tions  and  the  replies  were  inspired  by  one  mind,  if  not  written 

%  me  and  the  same  hand.  ,  _  .  ^  ,^  i  .  «  -j  # 
"We  have  already  seen  that  Pnnce  Hohenlohe,  President  of 
til*  Council  and  Minister  of  Foreign  Affisiirs  in  Bavaria,  addressed 
II  litter  to  the  French  and  other  Catholic  Governments,  calling 
HI  them  to  interfere  and  to  prevent  the  '  fearful  dangers  to 
which  the  Council  would  expose  the  modern  world.  Next  the 
ipiilsh  Minister,  Olozaga,  hoped  that  the  Council  would  not  sieet» 


AGCIKESSIONS  OF  THE  CIVIL  POWEB. 


17T 


or  at  leaat  would  *  not  approve,  sanction,  or  ratify  the  Syllabas, 
which  is  in  contradiction  with  modern  civilization.'  He  then 
threatened  the  Church  with  the  hostility  of  a  league  formed  by 
the  Governments  of  France,  Italy,  Portugal,  Spain,  and  Bavaria. 
An  Italian  infidel  then  took  up  the  game,  and  proposed  an  Anti- 
Ecumenical  Council  to  meet  at  Naples.  A  French  infidel  was 
invited,  who  promised  that  his  soul  should  be  present  and  said : 
'  It  is  an  efficacious  and  noble  idea  to  assemble  a  council  of  ideaa 
to  oppose  to  the  council  of  dogmas.  I  accept  it  On  the  one  side 
is  theocratic  obstinacy,  on  the  other  the  human  mind.  The  hu- 
man mind  is  a  divine  mind,  its  rays  on  the  earth,  its  star  is 
above.  .  .  .  If  I  can  not  go  to  Naples,  nevertheless  I  shall 
be  there.  My  soul  will  be  there.  I  cry,  Courage !  and  I  squeeze 
your  hand.'  The  reader  will  forgive  my  repeating  this  trash, 
which  is  here  inserted  only  to  show  how  the  liberals  and  infidels 
of  Europe  rose  up  at  tlie  instigation  of  Dr.  Dollinger  to  meet  the 
coming  Council. 

"About  the  month  of  June,  in  1869,  another  dispatch  had  been 
addressed  by  Prince  Hohenlohe  to  the  other  Governments,  invit- 
ing them  to  make  common  cause  against  the  Council.  It  was 
extensively  believed  to  be  inspired  by  Prussia,  the  policy  of 
which  was  thought  to  be,  to  put  in  contrast  the  liberty  accorded 
to  its  own  Catholic  subjects  in  respect  of  the  Council  with  the 
pedantic  meddling  of  the  Bavarian  Government  At  this  tiine 
General  Menabrea,  under  the  same  inspiration,  addressed  a  cir- 
cular to  his  diplomatic  agents,  proposing  to  the  Powers  to  prevent 
the  assembling  of  the  Council,  on  the  ground  of  their  not  having 
been  invited  to  it  It  was  supposed  at  that  time  that  this  policy 
also  was  secretly  supported  by  Berlin.  A  joint  dispatch  was  sent 
by  Prince  Hohenlohe  and  the  Italian  Government  to  the  French 
Ooiernment  urging  the  withdrawal  of  the  French  troops  from 
Borne  during  the  Council,  to  insure  its  freedom  of  deliberation.'* 

These  preparations  to  oppose  the  Council  were  made  before  it 
had  assembled.  It  met  on  December  8,  1869.  In  the  following 
January,  Dr.  Dollinger  received  the  freedom  of  a  German  city, 
io  reward  for  his  attacks  on  the  Holy  See. 

"  When  the  yfeW-knowa  postv latum  of  the  Bishops,  asking  that 
the  definition  of  the  Panal  Infallibility  should  bo  proposed  to  the 
Council,  was  made  public,  Dr.  Dollinger  openly  assailed  it;  and 
the  French  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs,  Count  Daru,  addressed  a 
letter  to  the  Holy  See  with  a  view  to  prevent  the  definition. 
Bome  was  at  that  time  full  of  rumors  and  threats  that  the  pro- 
tection of  the  French  army  would  be  withdrawn.  I  had  per- 
sonally an  opportunity  of  knowing  that  these  threats  were  not 
mere  rumors. 

"At  the  same  moment  while  France  was  attacking  Uie  defini- 
tion of  the  Pope's  Infallibility,  the  Protestant  Chancellor  of  Aus- 
tria, Count  Von  Beust  addressed  himself  to  the  Canons  of  the 
Schema  published  in  the  Augsburg  Gazette,  which  he  declared 
would  *  provoke  deplorable  conflicts  between  the  Church  and 
State.'  Every  European  Government  from  that  time  put  a 
pressure  more  or  less  upon  the  Council  to  prevent  the  definition. 


lid 


AOomEasioNS  op  thi  gitil  powbr. 


*•  The  sourc©  of  this  opposition,  then,  was  Munich.  The  chief 
agent,  beyond  all  doubt,  waa  one  who  in  his  earlier  days  had 
iMaa  giwatly  venerated  in  Germany  and  in  England.  Trutn  com- 
pels me  to  ascribe  to  Dr.  DoIIinger  the  initiative  in  this  deplora- 
ble attempt  to  coerce  the  Holy  See,  and  to  overbear  the  liberty 
of  the  Bisnope  assembled  in  Council.  Prince  Hohcnlohe  is  as- 
suredly no  theologian.  The  documents  published  hj  him  came 
firom  another  mind  and  hand.  Such  was  the  opposition  before 
and  during  the  Council. 

*'  What  I  have  hitherto  said  to  |)rove  the  conspiracy  of  certain 
European  Governments,  and  the  intrigues  of  the  Old  Catholics 
against  the  Council,  both  before  the  assembling  and  during  its 
sessions,  would  not  have  been  needed  if  the  Diary  of  ike  Voun- 
cil  by  Professor  Fricdrich  had  sooner  come  into  my  hands.  I 
lisve  been  feeUns  in  the  dark  for  proo&  which  he  brings  to  light 
by  a  series  of  astounding  confessions.  I  had  always  believed  in 
tibe  ©onspiracy ;  but  I  never  knew  how  systematic  and  how  self- 
Miiident  it  was.    I  had  always  known  that  the  Gnostic  vain- 

f lory  of  German  scientific  historians  was  its  chief  instigator; 
at  I  never  before  imagined  the  stupendous  conceit  or  the  malev- 
olent pride  of  its  professors.  A  critique  of  Professor  Friedrich's 
Diary,  by  some  strong  German  hand  has  appeared  lately  in  one 
of  our  |oumaIs.  and  I  can  not  refrain  from  giving  certain  passa- 
gee  in  Inal  confirmation  of  wimi  I  have  said  above. 

•'And  first  as  to  the  Governments.  Professor  Priedrich  puts 
into  the  mouth  of  a  diplomatist  the  following  words:  'The 
means  by  which  the  greatest  amount  of  influence  mieht  be 
biought  to  bear  on  the  Council  would  be  a  determined  and  plain 
manifeitation  of  the  public  opinion  of  Europe  in  favor  of  the  mi- 
nority. Clearly  the  Ouria  could  not  prevent  this ;  and  it  would 
aid  strength  and  numbers  to  the  opposition,  by  giving  it  thef  as- 
eoranee,  that  if  at  the  last  moment  it  found  itself  obliged  to  pro- 
test and  appeal  to  the  nation,  the  Governments  and  all  intelligent 
laymen  would  support  it.  This  measure  would  also  secure  "  weak 
sad  doubtful  bishops  "  '  (Diaru,  p.  184).  On  the  26th  of  Decem- 
ber, 1869,  Friedrich  wrote,  'That  he  was  considered  by  many 
persons  to  be  residing  in  Rome  as  the  representative  of  an  ap- 
proaching schism,  if  the  majority  obtained  Oie  upper  hand  in  the 
Council '  (p.  41^.  He  says  in  another  place :  '  It  would  not  be 
the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the  Church  that  a  schism  had 
liioken  out.  Church  history  recounts  many  such,  besides  that 
of  the  Greeks'  (p.  196).  The  critic  of  Professor  Friedrich's 
book  writes  as  follows :  *  The  alliance  between  *'  German  science  " 
and  diplomacy  was  not  productive  of  all  the  results  which  at 
first  had  been  looked  for.  Friedrich  expresses  himself  very  bit- 
lirlj  on  this  point;  nevertheless  he  endeavored  all  the  more  to 
exeitfl  German  science  to  fresh  efforts.'  Under  date  of  the  27th 
of  March  (p.  202)  he  writes:  *The  Governments  are  by  degrees 
Mting  an  almost  ridiculous  part  towards  the  Council — first 
boasts;  then  embarrassment  connected  with  meaningless  threats; 
and  at  last  the  confession  that  the  right  time  has  passed  by,  and 
iiairthe  Curia  has  command  of  the  situation.    If  German  science 


AGGRESSIONS  OF  THE  CIVIL  POWER. 


179 


had  not  saved  its  position,  and  been  able  to  establish  a  firm  op- 

Eopition  in  the  Council,  even  in  contradiction  to  its  own  will,  and 
ept  it  alive  ;  and  if  our  Lord  God  had  not  also  set  stupidity  and 
ignorance  on  the  side  of  the  Curia  and  of  the  majority,  the  Gov- 
ernments would  have  been  put  to  shame  in  the  sight  of  the 
whole  world.  Prince  Hohenlohe,  in  fact,  is  the  only  statesman 
possessed  of  a  deeper  insight  in  this  question,  and  by  degrees  he 
has  come  to  be  looked  upon  as  belonging  to  the  minority.'  * 

"  Of  all  the  foreign  sources  from  which  the  English  news- 
papers drew  their  inspiration,  the  chief  perhaps  v^as  the  Augs- 
burg Gazette.  This  paper  has  many  titles  to  special  considera- 
tion. The  infamous  matter  of  Janus  first  appeared  in  it  under 
the  form  of  articles.  During  the  Council  it  had  in  Rome  at 
least  one  English  contributor.  Its  letters  on  the  Council  have 
been  translated  into  English,  and  published  by  a  Protestant  book- 
seller in  a  volume  by  Quirinus  " 

A  distinguished  bishop  of  Germany,  one  of  the  minority  op- 
posed to  the  definition,  whose  cause  the  Augsburg  Gazette  pro- 
fessed to  serve,  delivered  at  the  time  his  judgment  on  Janus,  and 
the  letters  on  the  Council. 

"  Bishop  Von  Ketteler  of  Mainz,  publicly  protested  against '  the 
systematic  dishonesty  of  the  correspondent  of  the  Augsburg  Gar 
zette.*  'It  is  a  pure  invention,'  he  adds,  'that  the  Bishops 
named  in  that  journal  declared  that  DoIIinger  represented,  as  to 
the  substance  of  the  question  (of  Infallibility),  the  opinions  of  a 
.majority  of  the  German  Bishops.'  And  this,  he  said,  *  is  not  an 
isolated  error,  but  part  of  a  system  which  consists  in  the  daring 
attempt  to  publish  false  news,  with  the  object  of  deceiving  the 
German  public,  according  to  a  plan  concerted  beforehand.'  .... 
'  It  will  be  necessary  one  day  to  expose  in  all  their  nakedness  and 
abject  mendacity  the  articles  of  the  Augsburg  Gazette.  They 
will  present  a  formidable  and  lasting  testimony  to  the  extent  of 
injustice  of  which  party-men,  who  afifect  the  semblance  of  su- 
perior education,  have  been  guilty  against  the  Church.'  Again, 
at  a  later  date,  the  Bishop  of  Maina  found  it  necessary  to  address 
to  his  diocese  another  public  protest  against  the  inventions  of 
the  Augsburg  Gazette.  'The  Augsburg  Gazette,'  he  says, 
*  hardly  ever  pronounces  my  name  without  appending  to  it  a 
falsehood.'  ...  *  It  would  have  been  easy  for  us  to  prove  that 
every  Roman  letter  of  the  Augsburg  Gazette  contains  gross  per- 
versions and  untruths.  Whoever  is  conversant  with  the  state  of 
things  here,  and  reads  these  letters,  can  not  doubt  an  instant 
that  these  errors  are  voluntary,  and  are  part  of  a  concerted  sys- 
tem designed  to  deceive  the  public.  If  time  fails  me  to  correct 
publicly  this  uninterrupted  series  of  falsehoods,  it  is  impossible 
for  me  to  keep  silence  when  an  attempt  is  made  with  so  much 
perfidy  to  misrepresent  my  own  convictions.' 

"Again,  Bishop  Hefele,  commenting  on  the  Roman  correspon- 
dents of  the  Augsburg  Gazette,  »a.ya :  'It  is  evident  that  there  are 
people  not  bishops,  but  having  relations  with  the  Council,  who 

•  Preface  to  Vol.  HI.  Sermons  on  Eccksiantical  Subjects,  p.  xxy.,  etc. 


Jw 


A0QRBSSI058  OF  THE  CITIL  POWEB. 


AGORKtiSIOXS  OP  THE  CIVIL  POWER. 


181 


1^ 


sn  mmi  miniiied  bj  duty  mud  conscience/  We  had  reason  to 
lielieTe  thai  the  names  of  these  people,  both  German  and  Eng- 
Bdi,  were  well  known  to  ns. 

II  Uq^  iiig  testimony  of  the  Bishop  of  Mainz,  as  to  the  false- 
hoods of  these  correspondents  respecting  Rome  and  Germany,  I 
ean  confirm  by  my  testimony  as  to  their  treatment  of  matters  re- 
lating to  Borne  and  England.  I  do  not  think  there  is  a  mention 
of  my  own  niune  without,  as  the  Bishop  of  Mainz  says,  the  ap- 

Fndam  ©f  a  falsehood.  The  whole  tissue  of  the  correspondence 
u  false.   * 

I  havo  quoted  aU  this  to  show  the  small  chance  the  people  of 
Bni^and  md  of  knowing  the  truth  as  to  the  state  and  acts  of  the 
€k)uncilt  and  also  how  systematic  was  the  opposition  organized 
against  it  in  Germany. 

Alter  the  suspension  of  the  Council,  the  action  of  this  con- 
•piiacy,  hi^erto  secret,  became  open.  Dr.  Von  Dollinger  and 
certain  Professors  openly  rejected  the  Vatican  Council,  accusing 
it  of  innovation,  Tney  therefore  either  took,  or  were  called  b^, 
tii«  name  of  "  Old  Catholics."  This  schism  has  never  been  m 
one  stay.  Its  development  has  had  three  progressive  stages.  At 
irst  the  Old  Catholics  professed  to  hold  by  the  Council  of  Trent, 
and  to  reject  only  the  Council  of  the  Vatican.  As  such  they 
claimed  to  be  recognized  by  the  Pifussian  law.  But  next,  at  a 
SMting  at  Augsburg,  a  large  infusion  of  German  Rationalists 
«iiai>eired  them  to  enlarge  meir  comprehension,  and  to  include 
those  who  rejected  most  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

Jjastly,  at  Colore  and  Bonn,  they  received  the  accession  of 
Anglicani,  American  Episcopalians,  Greeks,  and  various  Prot- 
estants. 

The  Old  Catholic  schism,  therefore,  has  lost  its  meaning  and 
its  character,  and  has  become  a  body  without  distinctive  creed. 
Br.  Von  Dollinger,  at  Bonn,  last  September,  declared  (if  the  re- 
port be  correct)  that  Old  Catholics  are  not  bound  by  the  Council 
of  Trent 

III  the  sphere  of  theology  and  religion  the  movement  is  already 
fataiyied,  and  has  no  future;  but  in  the  sphere  of  politics  it  has 
ftgrwt  power  of  mischief  T  have  already  shown  how  the  first 
Mts  of  the  diplomatic  and  political  hostility  to  the  Council  began 
«l  Munich.  There  mm  be  little  doubt  that  it  reached  Benin 
through  the  Circular  of  Prince  Hohenlohe,  the  present  German 
Ambassador  at  Paris.  The  Berlin  Government  supported  the 
Old  Catholic  Professors  who  rejected  the  Vatican  Decrees,  on  the 
ifim  thai  the  Council  of  Trent  was  known  to  the  law  in  Prussia, 
but  that  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  was  not  known  to  it.  It  was 
mieae.  Therefore  the  Government  recognized  the  legal  status  of 
the  Old  Catholics  who  held  to  the  Council  of  Trent.  How  they 
will  itill  recognize  them  as  Old  Catholics  now  that  they  have 
rejected  the  Council  of  Trent  at  Bonn,  it  is  not  so  easy  to  saj. 
However,  Dr.  Beinkins  was  consecrated  Bishop  by  a  Jansenist 
Prelate,  and  received  from  the  Berlin  Government  both  legal  reo- 


*Fietn  Frw.  part  iii.  pp.  4-7. 


ognitiOn  and  a  good  salary.  We  shall  see  hereafter  that  the  Gov- 
ernment would  thereby  try  to  tempt  the  Catholic  Clergy  to  its 
friendship,  and  to  use  the  "  Old  Catholic "  schism  as  a  weanon 
against  the  Catholic  Church.  The  "Old  Catholic"  schism  has 
an  attraction  for  certain  minds  in  which  there  is  a  strong  hank- 
ering after  the  Catholic  Church  without  the  courage  to  suffer  for 
the  truth's  sake.  An  attempt,  we  have  been  told,  was  made  to 
set  up  an  "  Old  Catholic "  Church  in  London,  but  it  met  with 
little  encouragement. 

There  is  not  a  doubt  that  the  Berlin  Government  aims  at 
changing  all  the  Catholics  in  Germany  into  Old  Catholics. 

The  Old  Catholics,  in  their  appeal  to  the  Civil  Power,  aro 
doing  what  the  Arians  did  after  the  Council  of  Nicaea.  Tliey 
have  been,  and  they  will  be,  the  instigators  of  persecution  against 
the  Catholic  Church.  But  they  are  blindly  doing  God's  will. 
When  the  Church  has  been  purified,  their  place  will  know  them 

no  more. 

To  return  to  the  politicians  and  diplomatists.  What  was  be- 
lieved as  to  the  conspiracy  at  Munich  before  the  Council  met  has 
since  been  confirmed  by  the  letters  of  Count  Arnim,  which  ascribe 
his  own  action  to  the  instigation  of  Dr.  Dollinger.  The  Berlin 
Correspondent  of  the  Daily  Telegraph*  after  noticing  the  dis- 
crepancy between  the  dispateh  of  Count  Arnim,  published  by 
Prince  Bismarck,  and  his  "  Pro  Memoria,"  which  appeared  in 
the  Vtenna  Presse — the  first  "  treating  the  dogma  of  Infallibility 
as  a  mere  theological  dissertation,"  and  the  second,  "seeing  in  it 
an  event  that  must  overthrow  Catholicism  and  the  peace  of  Cath- 
olic States" — proceeds  to  explain  the  contradiction  thus : — 

"When  Prince  Hohenlohe,  as  leader  of  Bavarian  foreign 
affairs,  sent  his  well-known  circular  to  different  Powers,  explain- 
ing the  dangers  of  that  dogma,  the  German  Chancellor  applied 
to  Count  Arnim,  who  answered  that  the  Bavarian  Minister  ex- 
a^j^^erated  the  danger,  being  influenced  by  Dollinger.  After  this 
answer  was  sent  to  Berlin,  Count  von  Arnim  went  on  his  holi- 
days, and  in  passing  Munich  visited  Prince  Hohenlohe.  There 
they  spoke  about  Infallibility,  and  Prince  Hohenlohe  acknowl- 
edged that  the  Circular  toas  written  under  Dollinger  s  inspiror 
iioH,  The  Prince  asked  the  Count  to  visit  Dollinger,  which  he 
did.  Ddllinger  convincingly  explained  to  Arnim  the  importance 
of  the  dogma;   and,  on  his  return,  Arnim  tried  every  thin«  to 

Srevent  the  result  of  the  Council  by  repeatedly  advisinjg  Prince 
iismarck  to  interfere;  so  the  change,  in  Arnim' s  opinion,  must 
be  traced  to  Dollinger." 

Before  we  enter  upon  the  present  conflict  in  Germany,  so  care- 
lessly touched  and  dismissea  by  Mr.  Gladstone,  it  is  necessary  to 
record  the  fact  that,  in  the  year  1849,  the  15th  Article  of  the 
German  Constitution  affirmed,  that  "  Every  religious  Society  shall 
order  and  manage  its  own  afiBurs  independenUy,   but  shall  re^ 

*  Tablet  Newspaper,  Oct.  31,*  1874,  p.  546. 


I'DyB 


AOOBfiSSIOXS  OF    THE  OIVIL  FOWEB. 


A0ORE8SI0NS  OP  TUB  OITIL  FOWB&. 


183 


1 


4 

> 


aiais  ipbleol  to  the  geaeral  power  of  the  State."  The  Prussian 
Conttitption  also  recognized  this  independence.  Such  was  the 
law  itntil  1872.  Under  this  law  the  Catbolios  were  luval,  peace- 
ful, and  of  unimpeachable  allej^iance  to  'the  State.  They  served 
it  in  peaee;  they  fought  for  it  in  war.  They  helped  to  found  the 
Empire  in  their  blood.  Who  made  the  change?  The  Govern- 
ment of  Berlin.  The  laws  of  1849  have  been  violated,  and  a 
■eries  of  laws,  which  I  will  hereafter  describe,  have  been  forced 
upon  the  Catholics  of  Prussia.  The  conflict  was  thus  begun, 
not  by  the  Catholics  nor  by  the  Church,  but  by  the  Civil  Power. 
Prince  Ton  Bismarck  is  so  conscious  of  this  fact,  that  he  has 
Bjpared  no  accusation,  how  wild  soever,  against  the  Catholics  to 
disi^ise  and  to  mask  it  The  laws  resisted  now  by  the  Bishops 
ana  .Catholics  of  Prussia  are  not  the  old  laws  of  their  countiy, 
Imt  innovations,  intolerable  to  conscience,  newly  introduced,  and 
inflicted  uf>on  them  by  the  fine  and  imprisonment  of  five  Bishops 
and  1,400,  it  is  even  said  1,700,  clergy.  Surely  the  day  is  past 
when  any  one  believes  that  the  Falct  Laws  were  caused  by  the 
Vmtican  Council.  The  French  war  was  scarcely  ended  when 
Prince  Von  Bismarck  accused  the  Catholics  of  Germany  of  dis- 
loyalty and  conspiracy  against  the  Empire.  They  had  not  even 
hiid  time  to  be  disloyal  or  to  conspire.  The  Catholic  blood  shed 
in  the  war  was  not  yet  dry.  He  said  then,  as  he  said  the  other 
day,  that  he  had  secret  evidence.  Not  a  particle  has  ever  been 
produced.  For  a  time  Englishmen  were  perplexed.  They  did 
not  know  what  to  believe.  Thev  could  not  conceive  that  Prince 
Von  Bismarck  would  make  such  charges  without  evidence ;  but, 
little  by  little,  the  truth  has  come  out  The  Old  Catholic  con- 
spiracy has  been  laid  open  to  the  world.  The  manly  and  inflex- 
ible constancy  of  the  Catholic  Binhops,  Priests,  and  people  of 
Germany  has  roused  the  attention  of  Englishmen,  and  thej  have 
Mmetoknow  that  no  body  of  men  were  more  gladly  loval  to  the 
Prasaian  Government  than  the  Catholics  on  the  basis  of  the  laws 
of  their  country  from  1848  to  1872;  that  no  change  whatsoever. 
W  a  jot  or  tittle,  waa  made  on  their  part;  that,  on  the  part  of 
Government,  a  new  and  elaborate  legislation,  anti-Catholic  and 
intolerable  to  conscience,  was  introduced  in  1872.  The  whole 
innovation  was  on  the  part  of  Government  The  new  laws  ex- 
cluded the  Clergy  from  the  schools;  banished  the  religious 
ardors ;  made  Government  consent  necessain^  to  the  nomination 
of  a  Parish  Priest;  fined  and  imprisoned  Bishops  for  the  exer- 
cise of  their  Spiritual  oflice ;  subjected  to  the  State  the  education 
of  the  OerCT,  even  to  the  examination  for  orders ;  and  estalv 
lished  a  final  tribunal  of  Ecclesiastical  appeal  in  Berlin.  And 
yet  men  were  found  who  had  still  the  hardihood  to  say  that  the 
Church  had  begun  the  conflict  At  last.  Dr.  Friedberor,  Profes- 
sor of  Law  at  Leipsic,  and  one  of  the  chief  advisers  of  Govern- 
ment, in  its  Ecclesiastical  policy,  let  out  the  real  cause.  With 
sn  inoi|utious  candor  he  has  told  us  the  truth. 

I  will  take  the  account  of  Dr.  Friedberg's  book,  "  The  German 
Empire  and  the  Catholic  Church,"  from  a  pamphlet  of  the  Bishop 


of  Mayence,  entitled,  **  The  New  Prussian  Bills  on  the  Position 
of  the  Church  in  reference  to  the  State."  * 

Bishop  Ketteler  begins  by  asking,  "What  could  pompt  the 
Liberal  party  to  denounce  as  Ultramontane  presumption,  and  as 
ft  surrender  of  the  essential  rights  of  the  State,  that  which,  in  the 
years  1848-1850,  it  had  acknowledged  as  the  necessary  'conse- 
quence of  its  own  principles?'  "  (p.  9). 

Bishop  Ketteler  answers,  "The  true  reason  of  the  thorough 
systematic  change  of  the  Liberal  party,  as  well  as  of  all  those 
measures  aimed  against  the  lawful  rights  of  the  Church,  is  *  the 
spiritual  power  of  the  Church  based  upon  the  foundation  of 
freedom"    (p.  IX). 

He  then  quotes  an  Address  of  Dr.  Friedberg,  in  which  he  says, 
"  The  Doctrinaries  will  still  tell  us  that  the  all-sufficient  remedy 
of  this  is  the  separation  of  tiie  Church  from  the  State ;  but,  on 
the  contrary,  under  actual  circumstances,  this  would  be  a  very 
injurious  measure,  for  the  Church  has  become  too  much  united  to 
the  people.'* 

He  then  shows  that  wherever  the  Church  is  free,  as  in  the 
United  States,  it  is  powerful,  because  it  is  the  Church  of  the 
people.  *'  What  would  be  the  consequence,"  he  asks,  "  with  us 
if  the  Church  were  freed  from  the  control  of  the  State?"  "On 
the  contrary,"  says  Dr.  Friedberg,  "as  the  whole  question  has 
become  now  07ie  of  main  force,  the  State  must  go  so  far  as  to  de- 
prive the  Church  of  her  influence  over  the  people,  in  order  that 
its  own  power  may  be  firmly  established"  (pp.  10,  11). 

Dr.  Newman,  more  than  thirty  years  ago,  said  that  Governments 
establish  and  endow  Churches  as  people  cut  the  wings  of  mag- 
pies, that  they  may  hop  upon  the  lawn  and  pick  up  worms. 
"  Yiiberals  love  a  tame  Church." 

I  quote  this  in  answer  to  those  who  have  been  taunting  the 
German  Bishops  with  complaining  of  persecution  and  of  yet 
holding  to  their  legal  status :  Pharaoh  has  taught  all  oppressors 
"  not  to  let  the  people  go." 

"  Our  crime  as  endangering  the  State,"  says  Bishop  Ketteler, 
*'  consists  in  this — that  wheresoever  the  people  and  the  Church 
are  free,  the  people  turn  to  the  Church,  and  not  to  the  doctrines 
of  the  Liberal  partv"  (p.  13). 

"  Here  we  have  tne  whole  undisguised  truth.  To  separate  the 
Christian  people  from  the  Church,  to  deprive  it  of  freedom,  to 
subjugate  it  by  force  to  Liberal  Statecraft  and  human  wisdom, 
thus  reducing  it  to  a  Liberal  State-religion — this  is  the  triumph 
of  modern  science  and  knowledge  which  Liberalism  and  its  pro- 
fessors offer  to  the  German  people  "  (p.  14). 

Bishop  Ketteler  then  goes  on  to  give  Dr.  Friedberg's  argument : 
''The  Protestant  Church  is,  at  this  day,  a»  essential  political 
agent — solely  by  its  opposition  to  Catholicism." 

Dr.  Von  Holzendorff  says  of  the  Protestant  Church,  that  "  it 
has  no  intellectual  unity,  because  a  short-sighted  orthodoxy  has 

^ — ,.___,_.»______-»«_-_ — . — __-_—-.» 

*  A  translation  made  in  Germany  has  been  published  by  Messrs. 
Burns  &  Gates,  17  Portmau  Street. 


IMBBSSIOXB  OF  THE  CIVIL  TO 


town  tnd  fotiei«d  indiibcenee  towmrd  the  Omreli;  and  nJso 
ifom  the  fact  that  the  Protestant  Church  did  not  create  a  consti- 
tution iuited  to  its  own  spirit  Who  could  count  upon  the  High 
Couetstory  Court  of  Berlin  outliving  for  a  day  the  separation  of 
the  Church  from  the  State  ?  or  that  the  fiercest  party  strife  would 
not  break  it  up  into  sects  ?  But  what  an  opportunity  for  the  com- 
pact mass  of  the  Catholic  Church  as  opposed  to  these  dismem- 
bered eknents,"  etc^    This  lets  in  Ikht 

Bishop  Ketteler  than  sums  up:  "These  confessions  of  a  pre- 
tended Liberal  deserve  notice. 

••First,  the  Protestant  Church  is  'an  essentia!  political  agent,' 
and  especially  so  by  her  opposition  to  Catholicism. 

"Secondly,  the  Pniteilant  Chureh  ean  not  endure  freedom  and 
indepeiMtenee.  '  'After  sepavation  from  the  State  it  would  be  "dis- 
memlitfei;'  The  high  Consiatoiy  of  Berlin  would  scarcely  sur- 
vive  a  day.' 

"Thirdly,  out  of  these  dismembered  elements  an  increase  would 
fall  to  the  Catholic  Church.  Principles  trulir  Liberal.  No  longer 
■hall  the  power  of  truth  under  the  protection  of  equal  freedom 
ilMide  between  the  different  creeds.  In  the  hands  of  the  Liber- 
als the  Protestant  Church  is  to  become  a  *  political  aeent,'  '  a  tool 
of  the  State,'  to  fight  apinst  Catholicism.  Even  liberty  of  con- 
science on  the  part  of  tne  people  is  to  be  destroyed  to  avert  the 
dancer  of  their  turning  to  the  Catholic  Church. 

"Ijistly,  Dr.  Friedberg  refused  to  separate  the  Church  from  the 
Stale,  because  it  would  be  a  '  severity  and  an  injustice,'  forsooth, 
in  tiie  Old  Catholics.  If  the  Church  were  set  free,  the  Govern- 
iMiit  would  lose  'an  immediate  support  and  a  co-itperaUon  so  nee- 
mtwry  to  the  State  for  the  inienud  reform  of  the  Church.* " 

The  Bishop  then  sums  up  as  follows  :-~The  Government  has 
ulianged  its  relations  to  the  Catholic  Church,  "  not  because  the 
Catholic  Church  is  dangerous  to  the  State,  nor  because  it  is  hos- 
tile to  the  Empire,  nor  because  it  will  overbear  the  State ;  these 
are  not  the  motives,  though  thoy  are  daily  expressed  in  Parlia- 
ment and  in  the  press  by  the  Liberal  party,  to  show  that  the  Cath- 
olic Chureh  must  be  robbed  of  her  liberty,  but  because  the  Ger- 
man people  must  be  torn  away  by  force  from  the  Church ;  and  in 
order  to  attain  this  end,  the  Protestant  State  Church  and  the  '  Old 
Catholict'  are  to  be  used  as  weapons  to  fight  the  Catholic  Church, 
and  to  destroy  it  internally,"  etc.  (p.  17). 

Such  is  the  end  and  aim :  now  tor  the  means.  Dr.  Friedberg 
says,  "One  must  first  attempt  to  draw  off  the  waters  carefully, 
letting  them  flow  into  other  channels,  and  conducting  them  into 
reservoirs;  what  remains  will  then  be  easily  absorbed  into  the 
•it"  (p.  19).  In  other  words,  dry  up  the  Church;  draw  from  it 
ai  Intellectual,  moral,  and  spiritual  influence  over  the  people ; 
paralyze  the  action  of  its  Pastors;  substitute  Bureaus,  Registrars, 
Professors,  State  Teachers,  and  State  Officials;  make  its  worship 


•Ymr-Book  of  the  German  Empire,    By  Dr.  P.  von  Holiendorff, 
I^ipzig,  p.  478,  1872. 


AGORES8I0NS  OF  THE  CIVIL  POWER. 


185 


a  State  Ritualism,  a  ceremonial  of  subjective  feelings,  not  of  ob« 
jective  Truth.  This  done,  religion  will  soon  evaporate.  The 
sum  of  all.  Bishop  Ketteler  says,  is  that — 

"  The  State  will  regard  the  Church  as  a  historical  established 
institution,  which  may  be  very  useful  to  the  State  by  fulfilling  its 
peculiar  and  necessary  mission  for  the  civilization  of  the  Ger- 
man people,  but  which,  on  the  Qther  hand,  may  become  danger- 
ous to  the  State,  and  has  become  so. 

"  For  the  first  reason  the  Church  shall  be  not  only  tolerated  but 
also  be  authorized  by  the  State.  For  the  second  reason,  it  is  to 
be  rendered  harmless. 

"  This  will  dry  up  the  stream,  and  the  rest  will  evaporate." 

Ader  this  I  think  even  an  English  Nonconformist  would  read 
the  Uiiam  Sanctam  with  new  eyes. 

-  Now,  the  proximate  means  of  accomplishing  this  draining  of 
the  Pontine  Marshes  is  "  the  inward  and  outward  release  of 
the  Clergy  from  all  dependence  on  powers  *'  outside  our  nation," 
and  "  strangers  to  our  national  consciousness ;  "  that  is  to  say,  a 
spiritual  blockade  against  the  Church  throughout  the  world,  or 
"our  German  consciousness"  a^iinst  Christianity. 

The  inward  release  of  the  Cler^  is  to  be  effected  "  through 
their  education "  (pp.  29,  30).  Their  education  is  to  be  as  fol- 
lows : — 

1 .  Every  Priest  is  to  go  through  an  examination  at  a  German 
College. 

2.  Me  is  to  study  Theology  for  three  years  in  a  Gefman  State 
University/. 

All  independent  seminaries  and  religious  colleges  for  boys  are 
interdicted. 

3.  He  is  finally  to  be  examihed  in  the  presence  of  a  Commissary 
of  the  Government. 

4.  The  State  has  the  superior  direction  of  all  instruction  of  the 
Cler/y^. 

5.  it  fixes  the  method  of  their  teaching. 

6.  It  decides  the  qualifications  of  their  teachers. 

The  Bishop  is  to  be,  in  all  these  relations,  dependent  on  the 
State ;  the  state  forms  the  Catholic  Clergy  to  its  own  fashion ;  and 
the  Bishop  has  only  to  receive  them  and  to  give  them  cure  of  souls. 

The  Bishop  of  Mayence  justly  says :  "A  Clergy  inwardly  de- 
prived of  faith,  falling  under  the  bondage  of  unbelief  ana  the 
spirit  of  the  times,  would,  no  doubt,  become  the  perfect  ideal  of 
national  education  "  (pp.  35,  36). 

Next  for  the  "  outward  release  "  of  the  Clergy. 

First  it  means  that  the  State  will  regulate  the  appointment  and 
deposition,  and  the  correctional  discipline  of  the  Clergy  by  local 
Civil  authorities,  and  partly  by  a  Supreme  Royal  court  for  Cleri- 
cal affiiirs. 

The  Clergy  are  therefore  perfectly  released : 

First,  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Head  of  the  Church. 

Secondly,  from  the  iurisdiction  of  their  own  Bishops. 

The  effect  of  this  release  is : 

First,  that  any  fit  and  worthy  Priest  may  be  kept  out  of 
16 


IHH  AGOEBSSIOJta  OF  TMB  OlVIt  POWBE, 

tie  cure  of  loiilt  and  il  tpiritoia  offices  by  the  veto  of  llie 

*sLnd,  tbal  mj  niiit  or  ^^S^^y' Wr^Xi  "Z,  ^^"^^^t 
Prieit  may  be  supported  m  defiance  of  bw  Bishop,  to  the  scan 
dal  of  the  Chureh  and  the  perdition  of  Souto. 

An  unlimited  veto  is  an  nnhmited  r  ght  of  pa*T?»W-       ,.  . 

What  kind  of  mm  will  grow  up  oat  of  the  soil  of  Stote  Uni- 
vnniities  and  under  the  sun  of  State  ratronage  r  ,   ,.     .^^ 

Whrt  pri^t  of  fidelity  to  the  Church  and  of  penpnJ  digmty 

of  oh««ter  will  8cU  or  fend  himeeU  ^  »"?'' »/«»S?'Z  «d  M,r. 
We  have  read  lately  a  1  tUc  too  much  of  the     phaney  and  mi- 

Tility  "  and  "degradation"  of  the  0»'h»l'^pP.'fSP'^„  J^^'' \'i 
Se  ideal  of  a  Bishop  in  thoee  who  agsail  the  Vatican  Council 
«d  .wpi^thi'e  with  the  Old  Catholics?  By  these  laws  the 
oic?lTBi8hop.  are  liberaUd  or  releaned  from  the  foreign  op- 
Son  of  Bome^    The  Pope  «m  not  snspend  one  of  Aem. 

moral  sense  should  grow  upon  us.  «»f^^„al  rAlAiuia 

The  Bishop  of  Mayence  finally  sums  up  this  external  release 

of  their  Clergy  as  foUows : 
These  lata  amount  to—        , 
1  Separation  of  the  Church  in  Germany  from  Rome. 
2.  Annihilation  of  the  powers  of  the  Bishops, 
i.  The  breaking  up  of  all  authority  and  discipline  of er  the 

^'^nUmirtntrol  of  the  Slate  over  the  Clergy,  and  over  re- 

ion. 


rUniversal  and  moral  «^™P*i«V/f  t^^Xtr^^^^^  con- 

6.  Introduction  and  encouragement  of  every  form  of  error  con 

trarv  to  faith  and  to  Christianity  among  the  teachers. 
7  lioss  of  Christian  faith  among  the  people. 
The  Bishop  then  protests  againsl  these  l;'^«."Vfv„.«f«f;n«»l 
"A  violation  of  all  Christian  M^J^'*;»' *»*1,.«V*"  J^^^^^^ 

ri£hts :  as  an  attempt  to  force  on^the  Catholic  Church  the  Royal 

SuV«mcy  of  the  Irotestant  ^f^^^^jrc^^Jf  tj^^^^^^^^ 
Bi^ne  coMtitution  and  authority  of  *»'tAK^^l^i^^m  of  ^^ 
imaUy.  as  leading  men  back  »«^"/"**^,  ^^^J^^'?^,^?  ^ 
Paifan  world  in  wh  ch  the  temporal  and  spiritual  sovereignty 
wSe  urtJd  in  one  fmmm.  The^epan^^^^^^^  of  the  two  powers 
vbioh  the  Divine  Founder  of  Christiamtjr  has  introduced  for  the 
ZZtion  of  the  liberties  of  human  ife  in  faith,  consc^nce,  and 
wlirion.  would  be  once  more  extinguished  in  Germany  It 
would  then  be  easy  to  overthrow,  one  after  another,  the  otiber 
iSeiruards  of  the  fkedom  of  the  people.  The  army,  the  official 
sSSTpress,  or  Slate  school,  or  Stat«  Church.  ^1  united  together 
^d'^  transplant  the  old  despotism  of  the  Pagans  to  German 
•oil"  (p.  49). 


AGGBBS8I0H8  OF  THB  OITIL  FOWBB. 


187 


He  concludes  in  these  words  :~- 

"  Finally,  these  laws  are  in  their  whole  substance  revolution* 
ary,  and  a  denial  of  the  historicaJ  positive  development  of  the 
rights,  and  an  uprooting  of  all  the  constitutional  privileges,  of 
the  people.  They  will  bring  about  a  conflict  with  the  Catholic 
Church,  with  its  essential  constitution  and  its  doctrines;  they 
attempt  to  force  upon  the  Catholic  Church  a  constitution  similar 
to  that  of  the  Protestant  Church.  By  placing  all  earthly  power 
in  the  hands  of  one  man  they  introduce  the  system  of  the  hea- 
then despotism  into  Germany. 

*'  May  God  guard  our  German  Fatherland  from  the  disastrous 
consequences  of  such  laws." 

Before  this  noble  protest  was  published  these  Bills  became  law. 
I  hope  no  Englishman  will  now  say  that  the  conflict  in  Germany 
was  brought  on  by  the  Chorch.  The  pretext  of  the  Vatican 
Council  is  as  transparently  false  as  the  plea  of  the  wolf  against 
the  lamb.  Such,  then,  are  the  Falck  Laws ;  and  I  have  read  no 
part  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  "  Expostulation"  with  more  sadness  than 
the  following  words  : — 

"  I  am  not  competent  to  give  any  opinion  upon  the  particulars 
of  that  struggle.  The  institutions  of  Germany,  and  the  relative 
estimate  of  State  power  and  individual  freedom,  are  materially 
different  from  ours."* 

Are  faith  and  conscience  "institutions"  to  be  "estimated" 
"  relatively  "  ?  Is  religious  freedom,  to  the  vindication  of  which 
Mr.  Gladstone  has  given  a  long  public  life,  a  matter  to  be  meas- 
ured by  geographical  or  political  conditions  ?  I  do  not  recognize 
this  voice. 

It  may,  I  think,  with  safety  be  affirmed,  that  in  the  lamentable 
conflict  now  waging  in  Germany,  the  Berlin  Government,  urged 
on  by  the  conspiracy  of  the  "  Old  Catholics,"  aided,  no  doubt,  at 
a  later  stage,  by  the  pseudo-Liberals  of  Prussia,  has  been  the  ag- 
gressor. 

The  same  could  be  abundantly  proved  in  respect  to  the  perse- 
cution of  the  Church  in  Switzerland.  I  have  before  me  full  and 
authentic  evidence  of  the  aggression  of  the  Cantonal  Govern- 
ments of  Bale.  Soleure.  and  Berne,  and  others.  But  I  will  not 
prolong  this  chapter  by  a  recital.  The  proof  will  be  found  in 
the  Appendix  C.  , 

It  would  be  as  easy  also  to  show  that  in  Brazil  the  Government 
was  the  aggressor.  The  Bishop  of  Olinda  is  at  this  moment  in 
penal  servitude,  for  refusing  religious  rites  at  the  burial  of  an 
excommunicated  person.  • 

This  will,  I  hope,  be  deemed  a  sufficient  proof  of  my  third 
proposition,  which  in  sum  is  this,  that  the  present  collisions  be- 
tween the  Civil -and  Spiritual  Powers  have  not  been  caused  by 
the  Church.  There  is  every-where  a  party  aiming  at  the  subver- 
sion of  ChriHtianity.  The  great  barrier  m  their  way  is  the  Ca- 
tholic Church.     They  are  now  openly  conspiring  for  its  overthrow. 

In  England  our  old  craters  are  extinct  and  the  mountains  are 

■iw  - —  ■ 

*  ITie  Vatican  Bccrces,  dc,  p.  IS. 


w 


TBUB  IKD  FAME  PBOOBMS. 

I 

niiiitL  Sucli  ft  conflict  lifti,  liftppUy,  not  yef  been  rekindled 
21%  n«  No  change  onlSe  v^Ji  the  CathoHc  Ch«r«h  of  » 
kind  to  proToke  »uch  a  conflict,  either  haa  been  or  will  be  made. 
He  declining  to  accept  a  scheme  of  education  baaed  on  pnnci- 

Ijles  dangerou^s  to  CathSlic  Faith  « <^*'-»^^;/y  "^  «"«^^^  JX 
W  a  tempting  gift  ia  no  aggreaeion.  1^  we  are  wrain  to  be  die- 
Cted  bjVeligious  conflicts,  the  resnonsibility  wiH  'est  undmd- 
cdlv  nnon  the  head  of  any  one  who  shall  break  our  present 
public  confidence  and  peace.  And  that  miedeed  would  be  indel- 
ibly  written  in  our  history. 


Ill|' 

( 


IV.  Tmui  AND  WMjm  Ttmmwm. 

I  wEl  now  go  on  to  the  fourth  propoeition-that  l>yj^«»f  ^^; 
liaions  with  the  Church  the  Cif  il  Powers  everywhere  arc  at  this 
tinie  destroying  the  first  principle  of  their  own  8^f>»l»*y,-   .  ^    ,^ 

Mr.  Gladstone  has  represented  me  as  Baying  that  "the  civa 
order  of  all  ChriBtendom  is  the  offspring  of  the  Temporal  Power, 
and  has  the  Temporal  Power  for  it«  keystone;  that  on  the  de- 
Btraclion  of  the  ¥emporal  Power  'the  laws  of  nations  would  at 

once  fall  in  ruins.* "  ^    t  i-  n     -.«:.««  *\.^^  •   iina«i». 

Understood  as  I  wrote  these  words  I  fully  affirm  them,  unaer- 

stood  a.  they  may  be  in  this  garbled  form,  they  ^^^f.  ^V^"^ 

rtiim  which'is  not  mine  1  ''^^  T?^^"^^"*"^ y f  f,?: J^3™^ 
Power  of  the  Pope  over  his  own  State :  whereby,  as  a  King  amone 
Bngp,  he  Busta^ed  the  Christian  character  of  ^^^^\'^^'J 
was  not  speaking  of  Temporal  Power  over  the  Temporal  Govem- 
STnt  of  ?rkcesr'  And  I  was  speaking  in  defense  at  a  time  when 
every  journal  in  the  country,  with  hardly  an  exception,  was  day 
•Her  iay  assallinE^  and  I  must  add  ^fy^""^^  uTo%l 
and  Mm  of  the  Temporal  Government  of  the  Pope.  My  own 
words  were  as  follows:—  , 

"Now,  the  la«t  point  on  which  I  will  dwell  is  this:  that  as  the 
Church  of  God  has  created— and  that  speciaHy  through  the  ac- 
tion of  the  Supreme  Pontife  in  their  civiT  mission  to  tibe  world- 
this  vast  and  liir  fabric  of  Christian  Europe,  so  it  has  perpetr 
TOllf  sustained  it    I  aak.  what  has  given  it  coherence?    What 
is  it^that  has  kept  alive  the  governing  principle  among  men  but 
Hint  pure  faith  It  knowledge  of  God  which  W  gone  forth  from 
the  Holy  See,  and  has  filled  the  whole  circumference  of  Christen- 
dom?  Vhat  has  bound  men  together  in  the  j[«yj^*/?f  *^ 
mutual  rights,  but  that  pure  morality  which  was  delivered  to  toe 
Church  tigukrd,  and  oY  which  the  Holy  See  is  the  supreme  in- 
lerpreter?    These  two  streams— which,  as  St.  Cyprian  says  in  hw 
teeStise  on  the  unity  of  the  Church  are  .like  tke  rays  tW  flow 
fram  the  sun,  or  like  the  streams  that  rise  and  break  from  the 
fountain— illuminated  and  inundated  the  whole  Christian  world. 
Now,  I  Mk,  what  has  preserved  this  in  secuntv,  ^"^*^e 'f*"^" 
biHty  of  the  Church  of  God  vested  chiefly  and  finally  in  the  per- 
son  of  the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ?    It  will  rather  belong  to  the 
next  lecture  to  note  how,  by  contrast,  this  may  be  proved,  ana 


TRUE   AND  FALSE  PB06BBSS. 


191 


the  twofold  character  of  Christian  Pontiff  and  Christian  King. 
Luther's  blast  has  brought  this  down  at  hist.    First,  by  regdieni 
in  Protestant  nations ;  and,  secondly,  by  revolution  m  Catholio 
States.    The  principles  of  1789  are  Lutheranism  applied  to  pol- 
itics.   We  have  already  reached  the  time  of  cijil  marriage,  of 
secular  education,  and  of  States  in  their  public  life  without  Chri^ 
tianity.    But  let  us  not  think  that  we  have  reached  our  plaje  of 
rest.     Luther's  blast,  I  fear,  has  yet  more  to  do.    Faith  «  aying 
out  of  the  public  life  and  action  of  all  Governments.     There  is 
hardly  a  Catholic  or  a  Christian  Government  left.    The  people 
they  govern  are  divided  in  religion,  and  "  the  religious  difficulty 
forces  them  to  become  simply  secular  in  legislation  and  in  ac- 
tion.    So  long  as  there  vras  a  Christian  world,  the  Head  of  the 
Christian  Church  was  recognized  as  the  Vicar  of  a  Dmne  Mas- 
ter and  had  a  Temporal  Power  among  Christian  Sovereims,  and 
a  sovereignty  of  his  own;  but  now  that  the  nations  have  become 
secular,  and  no  longer  recogniue  his  sacred  office,  his  direction 
in  temporal  things  is  rejected  by  their  rejection  of  faith.     1  am 
not  arguing  or  kmcnting,  but  explaining  our  actual  state.    And 
what  18  now  the  state  and  condition  of  the  Christian  world? 
Where  are  the  Christian  laws  which  formed  it  m  the  beginning  f 
I  was  not  i^r  wrong  in  saying  that  the  temporal  Power  ot  the 
Head  of  the  Christian  Church  was  the  kejstone  of  a  world 
which  has  crumbled  from  its  Christian  unity  into  a  dismembered 
array  of  secular  and  conflicting  nations,  of  armed  camps  and  re- 
tarded maturity.     And  it  is  with  this  "  progress  and  modern  civ- 
ilization  that  the  Roman  Pobtiff  is  invited  to  conform  and  to 
reconcile  himself."     This  is  the  sum  and  exposition  of    modern 
thought,"  save  only  that  It  omits  the  Agnostic  theologjDe  Veo 
nan  existente,  and  the  anthropology  of  Apes     Mr.  "Gladstone 
Quotes  this  contemned  proposition,  recited  m  the  SyUabue,  as  a 
amvainan  against  the  Pope  and  the  Catholics  of  these  kingdoms. 
We  have  no  desire  to  see  the  Christian  Commonwealth  of  Eng- 
land decompose  before  our  eyes  under  Luther s  blast.     We  are 
content  with  the  English  Monarchy,  founded   and  consolidated 
by  our  Catholic  forefathers ;  and  with  our  English  Constitution, 
of  which  the  solid  and  unshaken  base  and  the  dominant  con- 
structive lines  are  Christian  and  Catholic.    We  Englishmen  were 
once  perfectly  one  in  faith.    Luther's  blast  has  given  «»  n^lj 
three  hundred  years  of  penal  laws,  bitter  contentions,  a     bloody 
reign  of  Mary,'*^  a  relentless  shower,  indeed,  between  two  seas  ot 
blwd,  in  the  reigns  of  her  father  and  her  sister;  and  when  these 
horrors  relaxed,  streams  of  blood  still  flowed  on  for  another  hun- 


se^ii,  and  that  against  nearly  a  half  of  the  English  population^ 
We  were  weakened  because  we  were  divided;  liaunted  by  su^ 
picions  of  conspiracy  and  scared  by  fancied  .<i^"f  ;?i  ^^^^^^^g^^ 
were  consciously  doing  wrong.  a«  Prussia  is  at  «»»  f  *^y;^^'* 
how  for  fifty  years  weTiave  had  peace.  ^^^^f^Z'^Kiltd^Z 
interests,  and  a  solid  common  weal.     The  three  Kingdoms  are 


m 

» 1 

%  I 


I- 


192 


TmUE  AKD  FALSE  PSOOSESa. 


f 


L 


without  anxiety  and  withont  fear.    And  why  ?    Because  we  haTe 
eliminaled  reUg|0ii8  conflicte  from  our  Legislation,  because  we 
have  learned  to  be  just,  because  we  have  learned  also  that  the 
Civil  Ruler  may  punish  what  men  do,  but  not  what  men  think, 
unlets  they  issue  in  acts  against  the  State.     All  men,  so  far  as 
consMMM)  and  faith  extend,  are  now  .equal  before  the  law.    No 
nan  is  molested   for   his   religion.     Although  this  is  not  the 
ffolden  age  of  uni^  in  truth,  which  the  Christian  Church  once 
created  and  Pius  lA.  declares  to  be  the  only  ciTilization  and  the 
<Mily  progress  to  which  he  can  conform  himself,  though  he  toler- 
stee  what  he  can  not  cure;  nevertheless,  it  is  a  silver  age  m 
which  we  can  peaceably  accept  what  we  can  not  either  justify 
as  the  will  of  Uod,  or  extol  an  the  normal  state  of  the  Christian 
worM.    In  our  shattered  state  of  religious  belief  and  worship 
there  is  no  way  of  solid  civil  peace,  but  in  leaving  all  men  free 
in  their  amplest  liberty  of  faith.    It  is  because  this  is  vital  to 
mat  welfare  as  an  Empire,  and  because,  as  it  seems  to  me,  the 
late  sudden  and  needless  aggression  on  the  Catholic  religion  is 
dangerous  to  the  social  and  political  tranquillity  of  these  King- 
doiis,  that  I  have  pointed  to  Germany,  as  a  warning.^    A  mon- 
twihy  of  a  thousand  years  is  a  majestic  thing  in  this  modern 
world  of  fleeting  dynasties  and  of  chronic  revolutions.     We  po^ 
•esi  a  royal  lineage  the  least  broken  and  the  most  closely  united 
to  the  people  that  the  world  has  ever  seen,  save  one.    The  line  of 
Pontifi  ruled  before  the  crowned  heads  of  to-day  came  into  exist- 
ence.    It  has  been  the  vital  chord  of  the  Christian  people  of  the 
world.    Next  after  the  line  of  Pontiflfe,  there  is  nothing  m  historr 
more  time-honored  or  grander  than  the  Monarchy  of  Alfred, 
which  reigns  to  this  day.     Does  Mr.  Gladstone  think  that  th« 
Vatican  Council  binds  me  to  desire  its  overtlirow?    Next  to  se^ 
ing  again  the  laws  and  the  faith  of  good  King  Edward  restored 
throughout  the  land,  we  desire  to  see  the  Sovereign  of  England 
leignmg  by  equal  laws  over  a  people  united  at  least  »».  every 
tiling  that  is  right  and  iust  and  lawful  in  this  world,  if  indeed 
they  must  still  be  in  higher  laws  and  truths  divided. 

One  thing  is  most  certain,  Catholics  will  never  lend  so  much  as 
II  finger  or  a  vote  to  overturn  by  political  action  the  Christianity 
which  still  liogers  in  our  public  laws.  They  will  cherish  all  of 
il  that  remains  in  our  popular  education.  If  we  could  see  the 
tfidition  of  our  national  Christianity  healed  of  its  wounds  and 
tiken  up  into  the  full  Efe  and  unity  of  perfect  faith  by  the 
■piritual  forces  of  conviction  and  of  persuasion,  as  that  super- 
iiAtiiral  unity  was  created  in  the  be|jinning,  we  should  rejoice 
with  thanksgiving;  but  no  Catholic  will  diminish  by  a  shade  the 
Christianity  which  still  survives.  We  can  not,  indeed,  co-operate 
by  aay  direct  action  to  uphold  what  we  believe  to  be  erroneous; 
but  it  will  find  no  plitical  hoetility  in  us.  They  who  wish  its 
overthrow  would  pull  it  down  not  for  what  we  think  erroneous  in  it, 
Imi  Ibr  what  is  true ;  and  what  is  true  in  it  we  revere  as  the  truth 
©f  Cbd.  In  our  divided  religious  state  the  public  revenues,  once 
fftid  into  the  treasury,  have  passed  bevond  the  individual  con- 
Mience.    Thenceforward  they  fall  under  the  impartial  admini»- 


TRUE  AND  FALSE  PROGRESS. 


19a 


tration  of  our  mixed  commonwealth.  I  am  not  responsible  for 
the  application  of  them.  My  conscience  is  not  touched  if  pub- 
lie  revenues  are  given  to  a  f'reibyterian  or  to  a  Baptist  School. 
Mv  conscience  is  nut  ill  at  ease  even  if  grants  are  made  to  a 
school  in  which  no  religion  at  all  is  taught.  A  people  divided  in 
reiigion  pays  its  taxes,  and  a  Parliament  divided  in  religion  votes 
the  public  money  by  an  equitable  balance  for  our  manifold  uses 
in  the  midst  of  our  manifold  divisions.  No  one  has  a  right  to 
control  this  mixed  administration  to  satisfy  bis  private  conscience, 
or  to  claim  to  have  it  all  his  own  way.  No  Secularist  can  regard 
my  schools  with  more  aversion  than  I  regard  his ;  but  I  am  pas- 
sive when  he  receives  his  share  of  the  public  money.  I  trust  the 
day  will  never  come  when  any  one  section  or  sect  among  us 
shall  gain  a  domination  over  the  equities  which  render  tolerable 
our  divided  state.  I  hope  no  Puritans  will  rise  up  again  to  do 
in  England,  by  the  help  of  Secularists  and  unbelievers,  what 
they  did  in  Maryland.  There  they  destroyed  the  fairest  promise 
of  peace  that  a  wrecked  world  ever  saw.  England  at  this  time 
is  Maryland  upon  an  imperial  scale.  He  who  shall  break  our 
religious  peice  will  go  down  to  history  with  those  whose  names 
Englishmen  try  to  forget. 

It  is  for  this  reason  that  I  lament  when  six  millions  of  British 
subjects  are  told  by  a  voice  of  great  authority  that  they  are  loyal 
indeed,  but  in  spite  of  their  reUgion.  When  men  are  so  taught 
they  are  very  apt  to  learn  the  lesson.  They  will  be  ready  to  say, 
if  by  my  whole  life  1  am  loyal,  but  by  my  religion  I  ought,  as  I 
am  told,  to  be  disloyal,  I  am,  therefore,  either  a  traitor  or  a  her- 
etic. If  I  am  a  heretic  I  shall  lose  my  soul;  but  for  imputed 
treason  I  can  only  lose  my  life.  If  men  of  Mr.  Gladstone  s  age 
and  fame  say  these  things,  the  masses  will  be  very  apt  to  believe 
them.  And  if  he  should  also  say  that  Pius  IX.  and  the  whole 
Episcopate,  and  the  Vatican  Council,  and  the  Clergy  of  England 
and  Ireland,  so  believe  and  teach,  I  can  hardly  find  fault  with  a 
plain  man  who  savs,  "  Your  arguments  and  quotations  are  above 
me,  but  I  know  that  the  Pope  and  the  Church  can  not  mislead 
me ;  they  must  know  the  Catholic  faith  better  than  you.  At  all 
costs  I  must  believe  them."  I  could  not  blame  such  a  man  in 
refusing  for  so  obvious  a  reason  to  listen  to  Mr.  Gladstone  when 
he  expostulates  with  the  Vatican  Council.  Indeed,  I  can  conceive 
that  it  will  not  promote  loyalty  in  England  or  Ireland  to  hold  up 
passages  from  books  written  even  by  me  in  proof  that  Catholics 
must  choose  between  their  loyalty  and  their  religion.  They  may 
be  more  likely  to  choose  to  err  even  with  me  than  to  correct 
their  faith  at  the  voice  of  any  politician.  Moreover,  they  may 
even  be  tempted  to  think  that  if  I  am  not  loyal  they  need  not  be. 
It  is  a  dangerous  thing  to  tell  a  flock  of  many  millions  that  the 
Pastors  they  trust  are,  or  ought  to  be,  disloyal.  They  will  be 
apt  to  say,  "  We  do  not  understand  it;  but  if  it  be  true,  there 
must  be  some  very  strong  and  sufficient  reason."  I  can  conceive 
that  the  Catholic  peasants  in  Germany  may  have  argued  in  this 
plain  way,  even  before  they  understood  the  merits  of  the  cause. 
They  saw  the  Archbishop  of  Posen  carried  off"  to  prison.  De- 
17 


■1  <rM 


TmUft  A.\II  FALSE   PICOCICE^S. 


jpeiMi  iiDoii  it  their  confidence  went  with  him.  This  is  playing 
with  eamd  tools,  and  in  a  matter  where  it  is  hardly  moral  to  pky 
at  all  Qreat  public  diMisters  might  be  cauRcd  by  the  game,  and 
the  costs  of  the  game  would  fall,  not  upon  the  gamester,  but  upon 
innocent  men,  and  women,  and  children. 

I  could  not  refrain  from  saying  thus  much  of  England.  But  I 
have  little  fear  that  the  stream  of  our  equal  legislation  will  be 
turned  aside,  much  less  turned  back;  or  that  our  public  peace 
will  be  broken.  The  destinies  of  the  British  Empire  are  in 
strong  hands,  guided  b^  calm  heads,  and  supported  by  a  bal- 
ancMf  mnd  steady  public  opinion,  which  in  the  last  two  months 
has  manifested  a  self-command  and  on  equity  which  do  honor  to 
our  country. 

As  to  Germany  I  shall  say  no  more.  Luther's  mighty  trumpet 
has  already  rung  twice  through  Germany.  It  rang  long  and  loud 
from  1S35  to  1M2,  and  apin  longer  and  louder  from  1618  to 
1648.  The  old  Germany  that  heara  it  has  ceased  to  exist*  God 
grant  that  it  may  not  give  such  notes  again.  Every  one  who 
hears  a  human  hearty  ana  a  love  for  the  Christian  world,  and  a 
gfMid-will  to  Germany,  mill  share  in  this  desire. 

But  if  the  conflicts  of  Governments  against  the  Church  are 
l:ital  t4>  the  public  jjeace  and  to  themselves,  as  assuredly  they 
would  l>e  to  the  British  Empire  if  our  accusers  should  rekindle 
old  strifes,  and  as  they  assuredly  wOl  be  in  the  German  Empire, 
whether  the  policy  of  Prince  Von  Bismarck  fail  or  succeed,  tnero 
can  be  found  no  sadder  example  of  this  disastrous  imprudence  in 
statesmen  than  in  the  case  of  Italy.  For  eight  and  twenty  years 
a  wanton  and  uiischievouM  aggression  against  the  Holy  See  has 
been  oarried  on.  I  say  wanton,  because  it  has  been  without  a 
eause.  I  say  mischievous,  because  it  has  retarded  and  endan- 
gered th®  unit^r  and  independence  of  Italy,  and  the  public  and 
private  Biosperity  of  the  Italian  people.  As  Mr.  Gladstone  has 
reviewea  his  relation  to  the  Italian  question  in  its  bearing  on  his 
Expostulation,  I  mav  do  the  same. 

At  the  outset  of  their  task  of  unifying  and  vindicating  the  in- 
depndence  of  Italy,  the  Italian  politicians  began  by  assailing  the 
pnncinle  of  all  unity  amonju;  men.  They  engaged  all  the  pride 
and  all  the  passion  of  Italy  in  a  deadly  conflict  with  the  special 
source  of  all  its  greatness.  Had  they  worked  from  that  center 
of  their  moral  life,  Italy  at  this  day  would  have  been  united, 
peaceful,  and  strong.  These  are,  indeed,  my  convictions,  but  not 
my  words.  Neitlier  the  present  party  which  rules  Italy,  nor  the 
party  which  has  encouraged  them  in  this  country,  will,  perhaps, 
listen  to  me.  But  they  will  listen,  I  hope,  to  one  who  was  an 
Italian,  and  a  lover  of  the  unity  and  independence  of  Italy. 
Vineenao  Gioberti,  in  his  "  PriiiiHto  degli  Italian i,"  after  proving 
that  religion  is  the  source  of  all  civilixation,  says : — 

"  If.  then,  the  whole  culture  of  a  people  has  its  impulse  and 
origin  from  religion,  how  can  we  treat  of  its  culture  without 
speaking  of  its  religion?    |f  the  culture  of  Europe  in  general, 

*  See  Archbishop  Trenph's  0uMmmt  Ado^m,  pp.  88,  89,  161. 


TRUE  XSB  FALSE  PROOBESS. 


195 


and  that  of  Italy  in  particular,  were  the  work  of  the  New  Rome 
and  of  its  belief,  how  is  it  possible  to  discuss  this  twofold  argu- 
ment, and  to  be  silent  about  Catholicism  and  about  the  Pope? 
In  writing  a  book  upon  Italy  I  protest  that  I  desire  to  speak  of 
the  living  and  real  Italy  as  it  exists  at  this  day,  not  of  the  Italy 
that  is  dead  these  fourteen  hundred  years,  nor  of  an  abstract  alle- 
gorical Italy  that  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  outward  world,  but 
only  in  the  brain  of  some  philosopher."  ..."  Italy  is  differ- 
enced from  the  Gentile  nations  by  its  Christianity  :  from  those 
that  are  in  heresy  and  schism  by  its  Catholicism ;  and  from  the 
other  nations  which  are  Catholic  by  the  fact  that  it  is  placed  in 
the  center  of  Catholicism,  and  not  in  the  outline  or  circumfer- 
ence." •  '  '  "But  among  the  Catholic  populations,  the  Italian 
has  the  privilege  of  occupying  the  first  place,  because  it  possesses 
in  its  heart  the  first  See. 

"  I  hope  that  these  suggestions  will  be  enough  to  justify  the 
small  amount  of  theology  that  I  have  put  into  this  book.  .  .  . 
Two  facts  seem  to  me  conspicuous  in  the  political  (civile)  world 
at  this  day"  ..."  the  first  is  the  exclusion  of  the  Theology 
of  Revelation  from  the  field  of  the  Encyclopedia  of  human 
knowledge ;  the  second  is  the  removal  of  the  Catholic  clergy  from 
the  influence  in  civil  affairs."  ....  "I  count  it  to  be  the 
duty  of  a  writer,  above  all  if  he  be  a  philosopher,  Catholic  and 
Italian,  to  combat  these  two  grand  aberrations  of  modern  civili- 
sation, and  to  recall  things  to  their  first  principles ;  endeavoring 
to  restore  the  universal  primacy  of  religion  in  the  circle  of  things 
and  of  knowledge."  .  ..."  I  therefore  do  not  believe  that 
1  deceive  myself  in  affirming  that  every  scientific  reform  is  vain, 
if  it  do  not  make  chief  account  of  religion,  and  that  every  scheme 
of  Italian  renovation  is  null,  if  it  have  not  for  its  base  the  corner- 
stone of  Catholicism."* 

After  a  contrast  of  the  theoretical  abstractions  of  the  Ghibel- 
line  party  and  the  practical  and  popular  policy  of  the  Guelphs, 
Gioberti  continues: — 

"The  Italy  of  that  day  was  not  the  Italy  of  the  ancient  Latins, 
corrupted  by  the  incapacity  of  the  later  Emperors,  and  destroyed 
by  the  ferocity  of  the  northern  barbarians.  In  its  stead  a  new 
Rome  had  been  created,  under  the  auspices,  not  of  Romulus,  but 
of  Peter,  not  of  the  Conscript  Fathers  of  Old  Rome,  but  of  the 
Episcopate,  and  of  the  councils  which  are  the  Patrician  order 
and  the  Senate  of  the  universal  Christendom.  The  Guelphs, 
therefore,  did  not  separate  the  civil  constitution  of  Italy  from  the 
Pontificate,  and,  without  confounding  the  human  order  with  the 
divine,  they  believed  that  God,  having  privileged  the  Peninsula 
with  the  first  See  of  tlie  faith,  mother  of  all  others  .... 
it  ought  to  exercise  the  chief  part  in  the  political  order  of 
Italy.*  ..."  But  in  this  day  many  think  otherwise,  and 
in  tneir  opinion  the  Pope  has  about  as  much  to  do  with  the  na- 
tional condition  of  Italy  as  he  has  with  that  of  China.  This 
comes  from  the  weakness  into  which  foreign  influences  have  led 

♦Gioberti,  Primato  degli  liatiani,  vol.  ii.  pp.  28-31. 


1% 


TIME  AND    FALSE  niOCRKSS. 


TRUE  AXD  FALSE   PROGRESS. 


197 


V 


tlie  Papacv,  mid  from  the  sprin-jiug  up  again  for  the  last  century 
uf  tli0  aracienl  spirit  of  the  Nominalists  and  the  Ghibellinei, 
under  the  form  of  Gallicmnism;  Jansenism,  Cartesianism,  Voltair- 
ianism,  or  under  the  disguise  of  rationalism  and  German  pan- 
theism, prompted  by  the  same  principles,  and  springing  from  the 
same  countries  respectively  as  those  former  heresies.  And  the 
©¥i!  will  kat  as  long  as  men  persist  in  substitntinc  a  heathen  or 
chimerical  Italy  in  the  place  of  a  real  and  a  Christian  Italv, 
which  God,  and  a  life  of  eighteen  hundred  years,  has  created; 
that  is  to  say,  a  French  or  German  Italy  in  the  place  of  an  Italy 
of  the  Italians.  But  I  can  not  understand  how  men  can  ascribe 
the  civilization  of  Europe  in  teneral  to  Christianity  (of  which 
there  is  at  this  day  no  writer  of  any  force  who  doubts),  and  not 
award  in  particular  the  culture  of  our  Peninsula  to  the  Holy  See; 
for  the  Pope  is  to  the  universal  Church  that  which  the  civilita- 
tion  of  Italy  is  to  tha|  of  Europe."  *  .       •     i. 

I  will  add  but  one  more  passage,  which  will  enunciate  in  the 
words  of  an  Italian  patriot  the  affirmation  I  have  made:-— 

"  The  separating  of  tlic  national  personality  of  Italy  from  its 
reliaous  principle,  and  from  the  dignity  which  spreads  through- 
out it  from  the  Christian  nionarchy  of  which  it  is  the  home  {res- 
idema),  m  not,  in  my  opinion,  the  least  of  the  causes  which,  for 
many  centuries,  weakens  the  minds  of  Italians.  This  error 
sprung  in  part  from  theliabit  of  arguing  and  judging  of  Christian 
Italy  after  the  manner  of  pagans,  and  in  nart  from  the  custom  of 
reasoning,  according  to  the^canons  of  a  philosophy  which  is  gov- 
erned, not  by  rational  ideas  nor  by  living  and  concrete  fiicts,  but 

by  empty  abstractioiw."  t 

Such  was  the  estimate  of  a  man  who  loved  Italy  with  all  his 
heart,  and  desirwl  to  see  it  united,  and  independent  of  all  foreign 

dvnasties* 

This  is  no  mere  speculation  as  to  what  the  Catholic  religion 
and  thffl  Pope  may  be  to  Italy,  but  a  strict  historical  fact.  The 
Pontifi  have  been  for  fourteen  hundred  years  the  chief 
popular  power  in  Italy.  I  say  popular,  not  dynastic;  not  des- 
potic, but  Guelf.  In  the  ifth  century  the  Pontiffs  saved  Italy 
from  the  Gothic  invasions.  St.  Innocent  I.  saved  Ravenna  and 
Home.  St.  Leo  saved  Italy  fnmi  Atilla,  and  Home  from  Gensenc. 
In  the  sixth  and  seventh  centuries  St.  Gregory  was  the  chief  de- 
fender of  Italy  and  Kouie  against  the  Lombards.  The  same  is 
true  in  the  time  of  Gregory  II.  and  Adrian  I.  In  the  ninth, 
tenth,  and  eleventh  centuries  the  Pontiffs  Leo  IV.  and  Gregory 
IV.  saved  Italy  from  the  Saracens.  So  also  John  VIIL,  John  A., 
Benedict  VIII.  beat  back  the  Saracens,  and  finaUy  drove  them 
from  Sardinia.  The  Crusades  of  Urban  U.  and  St  Pius  V.  saved 
Italy  and  Europe  from  the  Mohammedan  Power.  In  the  great 
contest  about  Investitures,  the  Pontiflfe  from  Gregory  VII.  to  C^ 
listus  II.,  saved  the  Church  from  subjection  to  the  Empire,  and 
Italy   from  subjection  to  Germany.    The  ecclesiastical  and  po- 

•Gioberti,  Friimit4f  detjU  Jtoliaiti,  vol.  li.  pp.  66,  67. 
I  Gioberti,  iVinuito  d^i  ItaMam,  vol.  ii.  p.  60. 


litical  liberties  of  Italy  were  ))oth  at  stake,  and  were  both  vindi- 
cated together  by  the  action  of  the  Pontiffs.  In  the  twelfth  and 
thirteenm  centuries  the  liberty  of  the  Italian  communes  was 
saved  from  the  feudal  despotism  of  the  Hohenstaufen  by  the 
Popes.  Alexander  111.  andf  the  Lombard  League  defended  popu- 
lar liberty  against  Frederick  Barbarossa.  The  City  of  Alexandria 
is  to  this  day  the  monument  of  the  gratitude  of  the  Lombard 
people.  The  City  of  Gaesarea  has  ceased  to  exist.  Innocent  III. 
and  the  Tuscan  League  saved  the  liberties  of  Central  Italy. 
Gregory  IX  and  Innocent  IV.  resisted  the  tyranny  of  Frederick 
II.,  and  finally  saved  the  independence  of  Italy  from  the  Impe- 
rial despotism.  Then  came  the  contest  of  the  people  and  the 
Empire,  the  Guelfs  and  the  Ghibellines.  In  these  conflicts  the 
Popes  and  the  people  were  indivisible.  In  the  fourteenth  and 
fifteenth  centuries  the  Popes  were  the  soul  and  the  strength  of 
the  Italian  Leagues,  wherebjr  the  people  and  their  liberties  were 
protected  from  the  enormities  of  tyrants  and  adventurers  and 
Free  Companies.  In  the  fifteenth  century  Nicholas  V.  main- 
tained peace  among  the  Princes  and  people  of  Italy,  and  drew 
Naples,  Milan,  Florence,  Venice,  and  Genoa  into  a  Confederation 
to  maintain  the  Italian  independence. 

Pius  II  protected,  in  like  manner,  the  liberty  of  Italy  from  the 
intrusions  of  France.  Paul  II.  leagued  together  all  the  Princes 
of  Italy  in  defense  of  Italian  freedom.  Julius  II.  labored  to 
drive  all  foreign  domination  out  of  Italy.  Leo  X.  made  it  his 
chief  policy  to  liberate  Italy  from  all  foreign  dominion,  and  to 
unite  all  the  Princes  of  Italy  in  a  Confederation  of  independ- 


ence. 


Paul  IV.,  though  unsuccessful,  was  the  champion  of  the  inde- 
pendence of  Italy  against  the  Spaniards.  From  that  time  on- 
ward the  Pontiffs  were  ever  in  conflict  against  Spain  or  France 
to  save  the  liberties  of  Italy  and  of  the  Church.  The  histories 
of  Pius  VI.  and  Pius  VII.  are  too  well  known  to  need  recital. 

It  is  therefore  too  late  in  the  day  to  go  about  to  persuade  men 
that  the  Pontiffs  were  ever  opposed  to  Italian  unity,  Italian  free- 
dom, Italian  independence.  These  three  things  have  been  the 
aim  and  the  work  of  the  whole  line  of  Popes,  dovm  to  Pius  IX 
Even  Mr.  Gladstone  acknowledges  that  Pius  IX.  is  "  an  Italian."  * 
Beyond  all  doubt  there  is  not  one  in  the  long  line  I  have  quoted 
who  has  loved  Italy  more  than  he.  There  is  riot  one  who  had  at 
heart  more  ardently  the  unity,  freedom,  and  independence  of 
Italy.  His  first  act  was  to  set  free  every  political  prisoner  with  a 
full  pardon.  By  that  act  he  showed  that  he  recognized  the  mis- 
directed love  of  country  in  those  who  had  been  seduced  into  false 
or  unlawful  ways  of  seeking  the  unity  and  the  liberties  of  their 
country. 

In  1847  Pius  IX.  invited  all  the  Princes  of  Italy  to  a  League 
of  Customs,  by  which  the  principle  of  Federal  Unity  would  have 
been  established.  From  this  germ  the  National  Unity  would  have 
iteadily  grown  up,  without  shock  or  overthrow  of  right  or  justice. 

*  Eqiostttlation^  p.  49. 


lilcl 


fBIJB  AND  FALSE  PR06RS89% 


TEUE  AND  FALSE  PROGRESS. 


1«.K> 


W 


Once  confederated,  there  was  no  identity  of  interests,  no  nnity 
of  power,  which  might  not  have  ;rrown  solid  and  mature.  Tins 
ana  the  Sapreuie  Council  for  the  Government  of  the  Pontifical 
State  are  proof  enough  of  his  de«ire  for  Italian  onityj  and  of  the 
far-reaching  foresight  with  which  he  aimed  at  the  elevation  of 
Italy.  And  as  for  Italian  independence,  let  the  following  letter, 
written  by  himself  to  the  Emperor  of  Austria  on  the  2d  of  May, 
1849,  wliee  :— 

**  Tour  Imperial  Majesty,  this  Holy  See  has  been  always  wont 
to  speak  words  of  peace  in  the  midst  of  wars  that  stain  the  Chris- 
tian world  with  blood ;  and  in  oitr  Allocution  of  the  29th  of  last 
month,  while  we  declared  that  our  paternal  heart  shrunk  from  de- 
claring war,  we  expressly  declared  our  ardent  desire  to  restore  peace. 
Let  it  not  be  displeasing,  therefore,  to  your  Majesty  that  we  turn 
lo  your  piety  and  religion,  and  exhort  you  with  a  father's  affection 
to  withdraw  your  armies  from  a  war  which,  while  it  can  not  re- 
fonqner  to  the  Empire  the  hearts  of  the  Lombards  and  Venetians, 
ilrsws  After  it  the  lamentable  series  of  calamities  that  ever  accom- 
pany warfare,  and  are  assuredly  abhorred  and  detested  by  yon. 
Let  it  not  be  displeasing  to  the  generous  German  people,  tliat  we 
invite  them  to  lay  aside  all  hatreds  and  to  tnrn  a  domination 
which  eonld  not  be  either  noble  or  happy  while  it  rests  only  on 
the  sword,  into  the  useful  relations  of  friendly  neighborhood. 
Thus  we  trust  that  the  German  nation,  honorably  proud  of  its 
own  nationality,  will  not  engage  its  honor  in  sanguinary  attempts 
against  the  Italian  nation,  but  will  place  it  rather  in  nobly  ae- 
Inowledging  it  as  a  sister,  as  indeed  Doth  nations  are  our  daugh- 
ters, and  most  dear  to  our  heart:  thereby  mutually  withdrawing 
to  dwell  each  one  in  its  natural  boundaries  with  honorable  treaties 
and  the  benediction  of  the  Lord.  Meanwhile,  we  pray  to  the 
Uiver  of  all  lights  and  the  Author  of  all  good  to  inspire  your 
Majesty  with  mlj  counsels,  and  give  from  our  inmost  heart  to 
you  and  Her  Majesty  the  Empress,  and  to  the  Imperial  family, 
the  Apostolic  benediction. 

"  Given  in  Rome  at  Santa  Maria  Maggiore,  on  the  thjrd  day  of 
May,  in  the  year  1848,  the  second  of  our  Pontificate. 

Pius  PP.  IX." 

The  following  passage,  from  an  impartial  observer,  will  attest 
what  were  the  intentions  and  desires  of  Pius  IX. : — 

"The  opposition  of  Austria  has  been  constant  and  intense  from 
the  moment  of  his  election.  The  spectacle  of  an  Italian  Prince, 
relying  for  the  maintenance  of  his  power  on  the  affectionate  re- 
gard and  the  national  sympathies  of  his  people ;  the  resolution  of 
the  Pope  to  pnrsue  a  course  of  moderate  reform,  to  encourage 
railroaas,  to  emancipate  the  press,  to  admit  laymen  to  offices  in 
the  State,  and  to  purify  the  law;  but,  above  all,  the  dignified  in- 
dependence of  action  manifested  by  the  Court  of  Rome,  have  filled 
the  Aiistrians  with  exasperation  and  apprehension.  There  is  not 
the  least  doubt  that  the  Cabinet  of  Vienna  is  eager  to  grasp  at  the 
slightest  pretext  for  an  armed  intervention  south  of  the  Po.  If 
■neh  a  pretext  do  not  occur,  it  is  but  too  probable  that  it  may  be 
created;  <tnd  any  dUtnrbancee  calculated  to  lead  to  such  a  result 


would  at  once  betray  their  insidious  origin.  Meanwhile,  the  Pope 
is  menaced  in  Austrian  notes,  which  have  sometimes  transgressed 
the  limits  of  policy  and  decorum ;  and  the  minor  Princes  of  Italy 
are  terrified  by  extravagant  intimations  of  hostile  designs  enter- 
tained against  them  by  the  National  Party,  headed  by  the  Pope 
and  the  House  of  Savoy,  in  order  to  persuade  them  that  their  only 
safeguard  is  the  Austrian  army.  These  intrigues  may  be  thought 
necessary  to  the  defense  of  the  tottering  power  of  Austria  south 
of  the  Alps,  for  every  step  made  in  advance  by  Italy  is  a  step 
toward  the  emancipation  of  the  country."* 

But  the  evil  genius  of  revolution  had  begun  to  work.  Across 
the  field  of  the  Christian  and  Catholic  traditions  of  Italy,  a  chim- 
erical theory  of  a  Communistic  State,  a  Republic  without  Chris- 
tianity, a  democracy  without  King  or  Pontiff,  forced  itself. 

Mazzini  had  been  crying  for  yearR,  "  The  Papacy  is  extinct, 
Catholicism  is  a  corpse,  and  the  Pope  knows  this.  .  .  .  Read 
the  Evangelical  Letter."!  He  had  taught  Youn^  Italy  the  three 
degrees,  of  Guerrilla  Bands,  Insurrection,  Revolution.  J:  The  mine 
was  charged  and  the  fuse  already  lighted.  This  widespread 
Secret  Association  covered  the  face  of  Italy.  What  followed  all 
men  know:  the  murder  of  Rossi,  the  siege  of  the  Quirinal  Pal- 
ace, the  wreck  of  all  authority,  the  Socialist  Revolution,  the  Ro- 
man Republic,  impunity  of  sacrilege,  and  a  reign  of  terror. 

Now  let  us  suppose  that  in  the  period  of  our  history,  when  the 
unity  of  the  English  people  was  gradually  consolidating,  some 
organized  Apostleship  of  Socialism  had  begun  to  whisper*  in  pri- 
vate and  to  preach  in  public  such  doctrines  of  conspiracy  as  these, 
and  to  teach  that  the  people  could  never  be  free  so  long  as  King 
or  Priest  existed;  that  aU  monarchical  power  and  ecclesiastical 
authority  were  enemies  of  the  public  weal ;  that  the  overthrow 
of  the  Monarchy  and  the  extinction  of  the  Church  were  the 
only  remedies  of  present  evils,  the  only  means  of  future  progress. 
Such  a  foreign  element  of  discord,  mistrust,  conspiracy  would 
have  divided  the  hearts,  intellects,  and  wills  of  the  people  of 
England,  and  rendered  its  unificgLtion  impossible.  The  unity  of 
religion  in  faith  and  worship,  the  unity  of  the  Spiritual  authority 
which  spoke  to  the  reason  and  the  will  of  men,  was  then,  as  it  is 
at  this  hour,  the  only  principle  of  unity.  Without  this,  legisla- 
tion is  merely  mechanical;  a  dynamic  power  is  wanted  to  bind 
men  into  one  people.  Our  forefathers  had  it,  and  the  English 
Monarchy  of  a  thousand  years  is  its  fruit.  The  Italians  have  it 
at  this  hour  in  great  vividness ;  but  Philosophers  and  Doc- 
trinaires, Conspirators  and  Communists,  are  perverting  the  intel- 
lect and  dividing  the  wills  of  the  rising  men  of  Italy.  If  such  a 
conspiracy  had  crossed  our  early  unification,  we  should  have  been, 


♦  Time»,  March  28,  1847.  . 

t  Life  and  WrUirigs  of  Mazzini,  vol.  i.  p.  248. 

tjSid.  p.  108,  and  Appendix,  1864. 


i 

4. 


200 


TIITB  A3m  FALSI  PS00RE88. 


MOTIVE  OF  THE  DEFIXITIOS. 


205 


quent  speech,  the  other  day,  that  a  people  which  breaks  with  its 
past  is  doomed  to  division  and  to  instability.  The  rupture  of 
Franc©  with  its  ancient  traditionn  in  1789  bus  generated  the  brood 
of  political  parties,  which,  from  month  to  month,  thwart  and  de- 
feat each  other's  action,  like  palsied  limbs.  If  Italy  should  break 
with  its  past :  if  it  should  forget  the  labors,  and  sufferings,  and 
dangers  which  united  its  Pontiffs  and  its  people  in  the  wars  of 
its  independence,  freedom,  and  unity ;  if  it  should  forget  the  con- 
Merations  wrought  bv  the  Pontiflfe,  by  which  they  made  all  the 
iwisions  of  Italy  work  together  for  the  liberties  of  the  whole 
Peninsuk,  from  the  Alps  to  its  foot— then,  indeed,  I  should  despair 
of  its  future.  It  could  have  no  other  in  store  than  a  chronic  war- 
lire  of  parties,  and  the  final  sway  of  some  successful  soldier. 

Of  the  population  of  26,000,000  Italians  not  three  millions  have 
launched  themsehes  in  the  revolution  of  the  last  twenty  years. 
The  great  bulk  of  the  people  are,  as  they  have  always  been,  Chris- 
tian, Catholic,  and  loyal.  The  Electoral  body  who  have  votes  to 
return  the  Italian  Parliament  do  not  exceed  in  number  some 
half  million-  Of  these  hardly  one-half  record  their  vote.  The 
Italian  Deputies  are,  therefore,  chosen  by  one-lmndredth  part  of 
the  population.  The  whole  Chamber  is,  therefore,  revolutionary, 
and  may  be  divided  into  two  parties — the  moderate  revolution 
and  the  eitreme  revolution.  The  Catholic  voters  abstain  from  all 
participation  in  such  a  state.  They  are  not  revolutionists, 
either  extreme  or  moderate.  They  could  elect  no  denuty  but 
one  of  their  own  principles ;  and  no  such  deputy  could  sit,  be- 
eaiise  to  take  his  place  he  must  bind  himself  by  oath  to  the  exist- 
ing state  of  things,  including,  therefore,  the  violation  of  the  sov- 
ereignty of  the  Pontiff.  More  than  this,  the  existing  state  of  the 
law  nas  invaded  the  liberties  and  jurisdiction  of  the  Church.  It 
has  abolished  religious  orders  and  institutions,  it  has  harshly 
turned  out  their  inmates  upon  a  pittance,  which,  if  paid,  would 
not  suffice  for  food.  It  has  confiscated  property,  seized  upon  col- 
lege, abolished  theology  from  the  universities,  and  the  Coristian 
doetrine  from  schools.  And  a^l  this,  be  it  remembered,  not  to 
meet  the  distracted  state  of  a  people  who  have  lost  their  religious 
unity,  and  must  be  provided  with  civil  marriage  and  secular  edu- 
cation, but  in  the  midst  of  a  population  absolutely  and  universally 
Catholic.  This,  and  not  what  Mr.  Gladstone,  with  a  strange  want 
of  accuracy,  supposes,  is  what  the^  Syllabus  condemns.  It 
nowhere  condemns  the  civil  policy  which  is  necessary  for  a  peo- 

Ile  hopelessly  divided  in  religion.    For  us  this  may  be  a  necessity, 
n  Italy  it  is  a  doctrine  of  the  Doctrinaires.    To  force  upon  the 
united  people  of  Italy  that  which  is  necessary  for  the  divided 

Cple  of  England  is  a  senseless  legislation,  and  a  mischievous 
aking  with  the  glorious  past  of  Italy.  I  do  not  now  stay  to 
fiwtll  upon  the  unpatriotic  and  un-Italian  agitation  of  men  who 
for  twenty-five  years  have  threatened  Pius  IX.  with  violence,  an'd 
assailed  him  as  the  Yampire,  the  Canker,  the  Gangrene  of  Italy. 
Such  men,  from  Aspromonte  to  this  day,  have  been  the  chief 
Mnderance  to  the  unification  and  pacification  of  Italy.  And  those 
wlio  in  this  country  have  encouraged  and  abetted  those  agita- 


these  acts  the  Pontiff  may  be  subject  to  error.  In  one  and  one 
only  capacity  he  is  exempt  from  error;  that  is,  when,  as  teacher 
of  the  whole  Church,  he  teaches  the  whole  Church  in  things  of 
faith  and  morals. 

"Our  Lord  declared  'Super  Cathedram  Moysi  sederunt  Scribae 
et  Pharisaei — the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  have  sat  in  the  chair  of 
Moses.'  The  seat  or  cathedra  of  Moses  signifies  the  authority 
and  the  doctrine  of  Moses;  the  cathedra  Petri  is  in  like  manner 
the  authority  and  doctrine  of  Peter.  The  former  was  binding  by 
Divine  command,  and  under  pain  of  sin,  upon  the  people  of  God 
under  the  Old  Law ;  the  latter  is  binding  by  Divine  command, 
and  under  pain  of  sin,  upon  the  people  of  God  under  the  New. 

"  I  need  not  here  draw  out  the  traditional  use  of  the  term  ca- 
thedra Petri,  which  in  St.  Cyprian,  St.  Optatus,  and  St.  Augus- 
tine, is  employed  as  synonymous  with  the  successor  of  Peter,  and 
is  used  to  express  the  center  and  test  of  Catholic  unity.  Ex  ca- 
thedra is  therefore  equivalent  to  ex  cathedra  Petri,  and  distin- 
guishes those  acts  of  the  successors  of  Peter  which  are  done  as 
supreme  teacher  of  the  whole  Church. 

.•  The  value  of  this  phrase  is  great,  inasmuch  as  it  excludes 
all  cavil  and  equivocation  as  to  the  acts  of  the  Pontiff  in  any 
other  capacity  than  that  of  supreme  Doctor  of  all  Christians, 
and  in  any  other  subject-matter  than  the  matters  of  faith  and 

morals. 

"  II.  Secondly,  the  definition  limits  the  range,  or,  to  speak  ex- 
actly, the  object  of  Infallibilitv,  to  the  doctrine  of  faith  and  mor- 
als.    It  excludes,  therefore,  all  other  matter  whatsoever. 

"  The  great  commission  or  charter  of  the  Church  is,  in  the 
words  of  our  Lord,  'Go  ye  therefore  and  teach  all  nations  .... 
teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded 
you ;  and  behold  I  am  with  you  all  days,  even  to  the  consumma- 
tion of  the  world.*  * 

"  In  these  words  are  contained  five  points : 

*'  First,  the  perpetuity  and  universality  of  the  mission  of  the 
Church  as  the  teacher  of  mankind. 

*' Secondly,  the  deposit  of  the  Truth  and  of  the  Command- 
ments, that  is,  of  the  Divine  Faith  and  Law  intrusted  to  the 

Church.  ,    .       .    '  -  - 

"  Thirdly,  the  office  of  the  Church,  arthe  sole  interpreter  of  the 

Faith  and  of  the  Law.  .....  ... 

••Fourthly,  that  it  has  the  sole  Divine  jurisdiction  existing 
upon  earth,*  in  matters  of  salvation,  over  the  reason  and  the  will 
of  man. 


as  doctor,  some  as  pope;  that  is,  as  head  and  foundation  of  the 
Church  •  and  it  is  only  to  these  (last-named)  actions  that  we  attribute 
the  gift  of  Infallibility.  The  others  we  leave  to  his  human  condi- 
tion. As,  then,  not  every  action  of  the  Pope  ispapal  so  not  every 
action  of  the  Pope  enjoys  the  papal  privilege.  This,  therefore  is  to 
act  as  Pontiff,  and  to  speak  ex  cathedra  which  is  not  within  the 
competency  of  any  (other)  doctor  or  bishop: '-Regale  Sacerdotium,  Ub. 

iii.  sec.  1. 
*St.  Matt,  xxviii.  19,20. 


soo 


rtmm  and  falsb  pboorsss. 


MOTIVE  OF  THE  DEFINITION: 


205 


'till 


liuenl  aiMeel),  the  other  day,  that  a  people  which  hreaks  with  its 
ptst  is  doomed  to  division  and  to  instability.  The  rupture  of 
IVanc©  with  its  ancient  traditionf*  in  1789  has  generated  the  brood 
of  political  parties,  which,  from  month  to  month,  thwart  and  de- 
feat each  other's  action,  like  palsied  limbs.  If  Italy  shonld  break 
with  its  past :  if  it  should  forg:et  the  labors,  and  sufferings,  and 
iiiiiffers  which  united  its  Pontiffs  and  its  people  in  the  wars  of 
its  iiiiwpeiidence,  freedom,  and  unity ;  if  it  should  forget  the  con- 
fedemtfons  wrought  bv  the  Pontife,  by  which  they  made  all  the 
diTisions  of  Italy  work  together  for  the  liberties  of  the  whole 
Peninsula,  from  the  Alps  to  its  foot — then,  indeed,  I  should  despair 
of  its  future.  It  could  have  no  other  in  store  than  a  chronic  war- 
im  ©f  parties,  and  the  final  swav  of  some  successful  soldier. 

Of  A©  popuktion  of  26,000,000  Italians  not  three  millions  have 
launched  themselves  in  the  revolution  of  the  last  twenty  years. 
The  great  bulk  of  the  people  are,  as  they  have  always  been.  Chris- 
tian, Catholic,  and  loyal.  The  Electoral  body  who  have  votes  to 
feturn  the  Italian  Parliament  do  not  exceed  in  number  some 
half  million.  Of  these  hardly  one-half  record  their  vote.  The 
Ilaliiui  Deputies  are,  therefore,  chosen  by  one-hundredth  part  of 
the  population.  The  whole  Chamber  is,  therefore,  revolutionary, 
and  may  be  divided  into  two  parties — the  moderate  revolution 
and  the  extreme  revolution.  The  Catholic  voters  abstain  from  all 
participation  in  such  a  state.  They  are  not  revolutionists, 
either  extreme  or  moderate.  They  could  elect  no  deputy  but 
one  of  their  own  principles ;  and  no  such  deputy  coula  sit,  be- 
cause to  take  his  place  he  must  bind  himself  by  oath  to  the  exist- 
ing state  of  things,  including,  therefore,  the  violation  of  the  sov- 
effeknty  of  the  Pontiff.  More  than  this,  the  existing  state  of  the 
law  nas  invaded  the  liberties  and  jurisdiction  of  the  Church.  It 
has  abolished  religious  orders  and  institutions,  it  has  harshly 
turned  out  their  inmates  upon  a  pittance,  which,  if  paid,  would 
not  suffice  for  food.  It  has  confiscated  proi>crty,  seized  upon  col- 
leges, abolished  theology  from  the  universities,  and  the  Christian 
doetrine  from  schools.  And  a)]  this,  be  it  remembered,  not  to 
meet  the  distracted  state  of  a  people  who  have  lost  their  religious 
unity,  and  must  be  provided  with  civil  marriage  and  secular  edu- 
eation,  but  in  the  midst  of  a  population  absolutely  and  universally 
Catholic.  This,  and  not  what  Mr.  Gladstone,  with  a  strange  want 
of  accuracy,  supposes,  is  what  the  Syllabus  condemns.  It 
nowhere  condemns  the  civil  policy  which  is  necessary  for  a  jjeo- 

fle  hopelessly  divided  in  religion.  For  us  this  may  be  a  necessity. 
n  Italy  it  is  a  doctrine  of  the  Doctrinaires.  To  force  upon  the 
united  people  of  Italy  that  which  is  necessary  for  the  divided 
people  of  England  is  a  senseless  legislation,  and  a  mischievous 
breaking  with  the  glorious  past  of  Italy.  I  do  not  now  stay  to 
dwell  upon  the  unpatriotic  and  un-Italian  agitation  of  men  who 
for  twenty-five  years  have  threatened  Pius  IX.  with  violence,  an'd 
assailed  him  as  the  Vampire,  the  Canker,  the  Gangrene  of  Italy. 
Such  men,  from  Aspromonte  to  this  day,  have  been  the  chief 
hlnderance  to  the  unification  and  pacification  of  Italy.  And  those 
who  in  this  country  have  encouraged  and  abetted  those  agita- 


these  acts  the  Pontiff  may  be  subject  to  error.  In  one  and  one 
only  capacity  he  is  exempt  from  error ;  that  is,  when,  as  teacher 
of  the  whole  Church,  he  teaches  the  whole  Church  in  things  of 
faith  and  morals. 

"Our  Lord  declared  'Super  Cathedram  Moysi  sederunt  Scribae 
et  Pharisaei — the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  have  sat  in  the  chair  of 
Moses.'  The  seat  or  cathedra  of  Moses  signifies  the  authority 
and  the  doctrine  of  Moses;  the  cathedra  Petri  is  in  like  manner 
the  authority  and  doctrine  of  Peter.  The  former  was  binding  by 
Divine  command,  and  under  pain  of  sin,  upon  the  people  of  God 
under  the  Old  Law ;  the  latter  is  binding  by  Divine  command, 
and  under  pain  of  sin,  upon  the  people  of  God  under  the  New. 

"  I  need  not  here  draw  out  the  traditional  use  of  the  term  ca- 
thedra Petri,  which  in  St.  Cyprian,  St.  Optatus,  and  St.  Augus- 
tine, is  employed  as  synonymous  with  the  successor  of  Peter,  and 
is  used  to  express  the  center  and  test  of  Catholic  unity.  Ex  ca- 
thedra is  therefore  equivalent  to  ex  cathedra  Petri,  and  distin- 
guishes those  acts  of  the  successors  of  Peter  which  are  done  as 
supreme  teacher  of  the  whole  Church. 

'•  The  value  of  this  phrase  is  great,  inasmuch  as  it  excludes 
all  cavil  and  equivocation  as  to  the  acts  of  the  Pontiff  in  any 
other  capacity  than  that  of  supreme  Doctor  of  all  Christians, 
and  in  any  other  subject-matter  than  the  matters  of  faith  and 

morals. 

"  11.  Secondly,  the  definition  limits  the  range,  or,  to  speak  ex- 
actly, the  object  of  Infallibilitv,  to  the  doctrine  of  faith  and  mor- 
als.    It  excludes,  therefore,  all  other  matter  whatsoever. 

"  The  great  commission  or  charter  of  the  Church  is,  in  the 
words  of  our  Lord,  'Go  ye  therefore  and  teach  all  nations  .... 
teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  1  have  commanded 
you ;  and  behold  1  am  with  you  all  days,  even  to  the  consumma- 
tion of  the  world.'  * 

"  In  these  words  are  contained  five  points : 

*'  First,  the  perpetuity  and  universality  of  the  mission  of  the 
Church  as  the  teacher  of  mankind. 

**  Secondly,  the  deposit  of  the  Truth  and  of  the  Command- 
ments, that  is,  of  the  Divine  Faith  and  Law  intrusted  to  the 

Church.  . 

"  Thirdly,  the  office  of  the  Church,  ar the  sole  interpreter  of  the 

Faith  and  of  the  Law.  ,     ^.  .       .     .  ^.  .. 

"Fourthly,  that  it  has  the  sole  Divine  jurisdiction  existing 
upon  earth,  in  matters  of  salvation,  over  the  reason  and  the  will 
01  man. 


as  doctor,  some  as  pope;  that  is,  as  head  and  foundation  of  the 
Church  •  and  it  is  only  to  these  (last-named)  actions  that  we  attribute 
the  gift'of  Infallibility.  The  others  we  leave  to  his  human  condi- 
tion. As,  then,  not  every  action  of  the  Pope  is  papal  so  not  every 
action  of  the  Pope  enjoys  the  papal  privilege.  Jhis,  therefore  is  to 
act  as  Pontiff,  and  to  speak  ex  cathedra  which  is  not  within  the 
competency  of  any  (other)  doctor  or  bishop."-i2fl^a/6  Sacerdotium,  lib. 

iii.  sec.  1. 
*St.  Matt,  xxviii.  19,20. 


206 


MCyriVB  OF  THE  DEFISITIOX. 


I 


"  Fifthly,  tlmt  in  the  discharge  of  this  office,  oar  Lord  is  with 
Hii  Church  always,  and  to  the  conHummation  of  the  world. 

"The  doctrine  of  faith  and  the  doctrine  of  morals  are  here 
explicitly  described.    The  Church  is  infallible  in  this  deposit  of 

WTelation.  ■     «  i_  i 

'•  And  in  thia  deposit  are  truths  and  morals  both  of  the  natural 
find  of  the  supernatural  order;  for  the  religious  truths  and  mor- 
als of  the  natural  older  are  taken  up  into  the  revelation  of  the 
Older  of  grace,  and  form  a  part  of  the  object  of  Infallibility, 

'•The  phrase,  then,  'faith  and  morals'  signifies  the  whole  rev- 
clalion  of  faith ;  the  whole  way  of  salvation  through  faith ;  or  the 
whole  superafttunil  order,  with  all  that  is  essential  to  the  sancti- 
fication  and  salvation  of  man  through  Jesus  Christ 

•*  Thii  formula  is  variously  expressed  by  the  Church  and  by 
iiMlociaiis;  but  it  always  means  one  and  the  same  thing. 

"The  Fourteenth  Ecumenical  Council  of  Lyons  m  1274 savs, 
•If  any  questions  arise  concerning  faith,  they  are  to  be  decided 

by  the  Roman  Pontiff.'  *  i^  i-  •  u 

"The  Council  of  Trent  uses  the  formula 'In  things  of  faith 
tind  morals  pertaining  to  the  edification  of  Christian  doctrine,  f 
"The  object  of  Infallibility,  therefore,  is  the  whole  revealed 
word  of  God;  and  all  that  is  so  in  contact  with  revealed  truth, 
that  without  treating  of  it  the  Word  of  God  could  not  be  yarded, 
eipounded.  and  defended.  As,  for  instance,  in  declaring  the 
Caiion,  and  authenticity,  and  true  interpretation  of  Holy  Bcrip- 

tupe,  and  the  like.  . 

••Further,  it  is  clear  that  the  Church  has  an  infallible  cuidance, 
mot  only  in  all  matters  that  are  revealed,  but  also  in  all  matters 
which  are  opposed  to  revelation.  For  the  Church  could  not  dis- 
©harg e  its  office  as  the  Teacher  of  all  nations,  unless  it  were  able 
with  infallible  certainty  to  proscribe  doctrines  at  variance  with 

the  Word  of  God.  ,,..,.    ^    i.  r  nr 

"From  this,  again,  it  follows  that  the  direcl  object  of  Infalli- 
bility is  the  Revelation,  or  Word,  of  God;  the  indirect  object  is 
whutsoever  is  necessary  for  its  exposition  or  defense,  and  whatso- 
mm  is  eontrariant  to  the  Word  ol  God,  that  is,  to  faith  and  mo^ 
ala.  The  Church,  having  a  divine  office  to  condemn  errors  m 
faith  and  morals,  has  therefore  an  infallible  assistance  in  discern- 
ing and  proscribing  false  philosophies  and  false  science.  |  .  .  . 
"I  will  not  here  attempt  to  enumerate  the  subject  matters 
which  fall  within  the  limits  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Church. 
It  belongs  to  the  Church  alone  to  determine  the  limits  of  its  own 


nertinentiiiui,"— Sess.  iv.  Decret  de  Edit  d  Urn  Sac,  Lib. 

I'^Further,  the  Church,  which,  together  with  the  A postohc  office 
ofteaching,  has  recefved  a  charjje  to  guard  the  deiwsit  of  faith,  de- 
rives  from  God  the  right  and  tlie  duty  of  prosiTibing  false  snence, 
lest  any  should  be  deceived  by  philosc)phy  and  ^ain  deccj^t  (Colos^ 
ii.  gyComMiMkn  mi  the  Catholic  FaUh,  chap.  iv.  "Of  Faith  and 
Reason." 


MOTIVE  OP  THE   DEFIXITIOX. 


207 


Infallibility.  Hitherto  it  has  not  done  so  except  by  its  acts,  and 
from  the  practice  of  the  Church  we  may  infer  to  what  matter  its 
infallible  discernment  extends.  It  is  enough  for  the  present  to 
show  two  things : — 

••Firstly,  that  the  Infallibility  of  the  Church  extends,  as  wo 
have  seen,  directly  to  the  whole  matter  of  revealed  truth,  and  in- 
directly to  all  truths  which,  though  not  revealed,  are  in  such  con- 
tact with  revelation  that  the  deposit  of  faith  and  morals  can  not 
be  guarded,  expounded,  and  defended  without  an  infallible  dis- 
cernment of  such  unrevealed  truths. 

"Secondly,  that  this  extension  of  the  Infallibility  of  the 
Church  is,  by  the  unanimous  teaching  of  all  theologians,  at  least 
theologically  certain;  and,  in  the  judgment  of  the  majority  of 
theologians,  certain  by  the  certainty  of  faith. 

"Such  is  the  traditional  doctrine  respecting  the  Infallibili^  of 
the  Church  in  faith  and  morals.  By  the  definition  of  the  Vati- 
can Council,  what  is  traditionally  believed  by  all  the  faithful  in 
respect  to  the  Church  is  expressly  declared  of  the  Roman  Pon- 
tiff. But  the  definition  of  the  extent  of  that  Infallibility,  and  of 
the  certainty  on  which  it  rests,  in  matters  not  revealed,  has  not 
been  treated  as  yet,  but  is  left  for  the  second  part  of  the  Schema 
de  Ecclesia. 

"  Again,  the  definition  declares  the  efficient  cause  of  Infalli- 
bility to  be  a  Divine  assistance  promised  to  Peter  and  in  Peter  to 
his  successors 

"The  explicit  promise  is  that  of  our  Divine  Lord  to  Peter,  'I 
have  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not;  and  thou,  being  once 
converted,  confirm  thy  brethren.'  * 

"The  implicit  promise  is  in  the  words,  *0n  this  rock  I  will 
build  my  Church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against 

>^'t    .     •     • 

"  The  Divine  assistance  is  therefore  a  charisma,  a  grace  of  the 

supernatural  order,  attached  to  the  Primacy  of  Peter,  which  is 

perpetual  in  his  successors. 

"  I  need  hardly  point  out  that  between  the  charisma,  or  gratia 
gratis  data,  of  InMlibility  and  the  idea  of  impeccability  there  is 
no  connection.  I  should  not  so  much  as  notice  it,  if  some  had 
not  strangely  obscured  the  subject  by  introducing  this  confusion. 
I  should  have  thought  that  the  gift  of  prophecy  in  Balaam  and 
Caiaphas,  to  say  nothing  of  the  powers  of  the  priesthood,  which 
are  the  same  in  good  and  bad  alike,  would  have  been  enough  to 
make  such  confusion  impossible. 

"The  preface  to  the  Definition  carefully  lays  down  that  Infalli- 
bility is  not  inspiration. 

"The  Divine  assistance  by  which  the  Pontiff  are  guarded  from 
error,  when  as  Pontiffs  they  teach  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals, 
contains  no  new  revelation.  Inspiration  contained,  not  only  as- 
sistance in  writing,  but  sometimes  the  suggestion  of  truths  not 
otherwise  known.  The  Pontiffs  are  witnesses,  teachers,  and 
judges  of  the  revelation  already  given  to  the  Church;   and  in 


♦St.  Luke  xxii.  32. 


fSt.  Matt.  xvi.  18. 


208 


MOTITE  OF  TEE  DBFIXITIOK. 


giiArding,  ©ipounding,  and  defenditipt  that  revelation,  their  wit- 
ness, tetuliini,  lud  judgment  are  by  Divine  assistance  preserved 
foim  error.**  * 

I  wiU  now  answer  Mr.  Gladstone's  question — ^why  the  Definition 
wni  made.  The  Vatican  Council,  then,  defined  the  Infallibility 
of  the  Head  of  the  Church,  because,  if  it  had  failed  to  do  so,  the 
doctrinal  authority  of  the  Church  would  have  been  weakened 
throughout  the  world.  Every  motive  of  worldly  i^olicy  would 
have  tempted  the  Coun<  i  to  compromise,  and  to  shrink  from  de- 
fining it;  but  the  perei  ptory  obligations  of  Divine  Truth  com- 
pelled it  in  defiance  of  all  policy  to  define  it.  Necessity  was  laid 
upon  the  Council,  and  it  could  not  recede.  Universal  doubt  and 
Bsepticism  are  pervading  men  and  nations :  therefore  the  Church 
defined  the  Infallibility  of  its  Head,  which  is  the  confirmation  of 
its  own.  As  a  Divine  witness,  it  declared  his  commission,  and 
the  powers  given  for  its  exercise.  The  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ  tes- 
tiiea  to  the  world,  wearied  with  doubt  and  sick  with  religious 
contentions,  that  the  promise  of  his  Master,  "  He  that  heareth 
you  heareth  Me,*'  lias  mot  failed.  The  definition  of  the  Infalli- 
ble teaching  of  the  Church  by  its  Head  affirms  that  there  is  still 
a  divine  certainty  of  faith  upon  earth ;  and  that,  as  God  is  the 
sole  Fountain  of  all  Truth,  so  the  Church  is  the  only  channel  of 
its  conveyance  and  custody  amon^  men.  No  other  policy  prompted 
the  Definition.  And  even  though  the  combined  hostility  of  Civil 
Powers,  as  we  now  see  it,  had  been  heated  sevenfold  hot  before 
its  eyes,  the  Council  would  not  have  swerved  from  declaring, 
Hhittier  politic  or  not,  the  truth  delivered  to  its  charge.  If  I 
■peak  witSiout  hesitation,  it  is  because  I  am  able  to  speak  of  that 
which  I  saw  with  my  own  eyes,  and  heard  with  my  own  ears. 

I  hope  I  shall  not  violate  any  confidence  which  ought  to  be  sa- 
cred, or  any  reserve  the  delicacy  of  which  I  fully  recognize,  in 
jjoing  on  to  state  a  fact  of  which  I  am  able  to  give  personal  tes- 

timoiiy* 

One  day,  during  the  deliberations  of  the  Council,  when  the 
pressure  of  Diplomatists,  and  Governments,  and  journals  was  at 
Its  highest*  the  Holy  Father  said,  "  I  have  just  been  warned  that 
if  the  Council  shall  persist  in  making  this  definition,  the  pro- 
tection of  the  French'  army  will  be  withdrawn."  After  a  pause 
he  added,  with  great  calmness,  "As  if  the  unworthy  Vicar  of 
Jesus  Christ  could  be  swayed  by  such  motives  as  these."  I  can 
with  perfect  certainty  affirm  that  "policy"  had  as  little  influence 
on  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  as  it  iiad  on  the  Council  of  Nicaea; 
and  that  to  ascribe  the  Definition  to  policy  is  as  strange  an  aber- 
ration of  judgment  as  to  ascribe  to  the  Definition  the  occupation 
of  Rome,  or  the  Franco-German  war  to  the  Jesuits  and  to  the 
Pope.     When  men  say  these  things,  can  they  believe  them? 

It  needs  but  little  of  the  historic  spirit  to  perceive  that  if  the 
Vatican  Council,  for  such  motives  as  these,  ought  to  have  ab- 
stained from  defining  the  Infallibility  of  the  Head  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  the  Council  of  Nicaea  ought  also  to  have  abstained 

*Ftin  Prmkffium,  part  iii.  pp.  56-60,  iS  78,  84.    (Longmans,  1870.) 


MOTIVE  OF  THE  DEFIXITIOX. 


209 


from  defining  the  Homoomion.    There  vras  violence  all  round 
about  it.     There  was  the  certainty  of  a  schism.     After  the  Coun- 
cil eighty  Bishops  apostatized.     They  appealed,  as  all  heretics 
ever  do,  to  the  Civil  Powers.     The  Arian  Schism  was  formed;  it 
was  protected  by  Emperor  after  Emperor.     Arianism  became  a 
State  tool  against  the  Catholic  Church.     It  infected  Constantino- 
ple ;  it  spread  into  Italy  and  Spain ;  it  lasted  for  centuries.     But 
where  is  it  now?    And  where  now  is  the  Creed  of  Nicaea?    The 
Hombousion  is  at  this  day  in  the  heart  of  the  whole  Church 
throughout  the  world.     So  will  it  be  with  the  Council  of  the  Vat- 
ican.    What  the  Council  of  Florence  implicitly  declared,  and  the 
Council  of  Trent  assumed  as  of  faith,  that  the  Council  of  the  Vat- 
ican explicitly  defined.     It  is  very  true  that  since  the  Council  of 
Constance,  that  is,  since  the  great  schism  of  the  West,  when  the 
Civil  powers  of  Europe,  for  a  time,  shook  the  visible  unity  of  the 
Church  bv  endeavoring  to  lessen  the  authority  of  its  Head,  the 
power  of  "the  Roman  Pontiff  has  steadily  consolidated  itself  in 
the  intellect  and  the  will  of  the  Church.    What  was  believed  from 
the  beginning  has  been  now  forced  into  explicit  declaration.    But 
while  the  Church  has  thus  been  more  and  more  defining  its  faith 
with  a  Divine  precision,  the  world  has  wandered  off"  farther  and 
farther  into  the  wilderness  of  unbelief     The  Council  of  Trent 
defined  the  particular  doctrines  denied  by  Luther's  Reformation. 
But  it  did  not  deal  with  the  master  principle  on  which  it  rested. 
The  chief  character  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  the  denial  of 
the  Divine  authority  of  the  Church,  secured  to  it  in  virtue  of  a 
perpetual  assistance  of  the  Spirit  of  Truth.     Three   hundred 
years   have   unfolded  the   consequences  of   this   denial.     It   is 
nearly  complete  in  the  rationalism  and  infidelity  of  Germany. 
The  "Centuria  praerogativa"  has  a  mournful  privilege  of  prece- 
dence in  the  Comitia  of  unbelievers.     It  has  run  its  course,  too, 
in  Switzerland ;  and  I  must  add,  with  sadness,  it  is  running  its 
course  in  the  widespread  doubt  which  is  undermining  the  Chris- 
tianity of  England.     Day  after  day  I  hear  the  words,  "I  wish  I 
knew  what  to  believe,  and  why  to  believe  any  thing:     and  this 
from  some  of  the  noblest  and  most  masculine  natures,  who  re- 
coil from  the  incoherence  and  contradiction  of  teachers  who 
§ainsay  one  another.     But  here  is  a  subject  on  which  I  have  no 
esire  to  enter.     If  I  were  asked  to  say  what  is  the  chief  intel- 
lectual malady  of  England  and  of  the  world  at  this  day,  I  should 
say,  ubiquitous,  universal  doubt,  an  uncertainty  which  came  in 
like  a  flood  after  the  rejection  of  the  Divine  certainty  of  Faith. 
This  uncertainty  has  already  led  multitudes  to  an  entire  rejection 
of  Christianity;  and  they  have  not  rested  even  in  Deism.    They 
have  gone  on  to  the  rejection  even  of  natural  religion.     Thev 
have  no  certainty  that  they  have  a  conscience,  or  a  will,  or  a  soul, 
or  a  law  of  morality,  or  that  there  is  a  God.    Three  hundred  years 
hence,  when  men  look  back  upon  the  Council  of  the  Vatican,  as  they 
now  look  back  upon  the  Council  of  Trent— I  will  say  even  thirty 
years  hence,  when  the  noise  and  dust  of  the  present  conflict  is 
laid— they  who  have  faith  left  in  them  will  recognize  the  Divine 
guidance  under  which  the  Council  of  tlie  Vatican  declared  the  exist- 


005CLCSI0>'. 

eiicc  of  Ood.  with  all  the  truths  radiating  from  it.  as  resting  upon 
the  witness  of  the  visible  world;  and  also  the  Divme  certainty  of 
the  Faith,  as  resting  upon  the  witness  of  the  Visible  Chureh  and 
inding  its  perpetofi  and  infallible  expression  in  the  voice  of  ita 

But  It  irnow  more  than  time  to  Rum  up  what  1  hope  has  been 

•tffiiSfrnTer  to  the  charge  that  the  Vatican  Council  haa 
made  it  impossible  for  Catholics  to  render  a  loyal  ciyil  allegiance, 
k  that  the  Vatican  Council  has  not  touched  our  ciVil  allegiance  at 
dl;  that  the  laws  which  govern  our  civil  ^^^f  Jff^f  ?,^^  ^.^^ 
the  revelation  of  Christianity,  and  are  regulated  by  t^e  Dmne 
constitution  of  the  Church  and  the  immutable  duties  of  «ajural 
nmrality.    We  were  bound  by  all  these  obligations  before  the 
Valiean  Council  eiisted.    They  are  of  Dmne  institution,  and  are 
beyond  all  change,  being  in  themselves  «iic^.*"g^*^^«-    /,.*'?7^ 
Zwn,  I  hope,  tfat  in  the  conflicts  of  the  Civil  Powers  with  the 
Church,  the  causes  have  arisen,   not  from  acts  of  tl»«  Church 
|>ut  from  such  acts  as  the  Constitutions  ^^  Clarendon  the  claim 
of  Investitures,  the  creation  of  Royal  Courts  of  final  appeal,  and 
the  like;  that  these  invasions  of  the  Spmt««a  doma       v^^^^^ 
been  from  the  attempts  of  Government  to  subject  the  Church  to 
their  own  jurisdiction;  and  now  more  than  «Y«[;^;f^J^,/|^^:^«^^ 
sal  and  simultaneous  conspiracy  against  it.     A  leader  of  this  con 
BBiracy  said  the  other  day.  "The  net  is  now  drawn  so  close  about 
S^Ch^rch  of  Rome  that'if  it  escape  *?i«  ^°^«  ^^^^  ^^^^^^^ 
Im  Bivine  "     If  God  grant  him  hfe,  I  have  hope  of  his  conyer- 
Sfen     For.  that  the  Church  of  Rome  will  escape  out  of  the  net  is 
Tftain,  and  that  for  two  reasons:    first,  for  the  same  reason  why 
its  Divine  Head  rose  again  from  the  grave-' '  it  was  not  po«f.ib  e  that 
He  should  be  holden  by  it; -and  next,  because  the  Civ  1  Gov- 
ernments, that  are  now  conspiring  against  it   are  Preparing  lor 
their  own  dissolution.     Finalfy .  I  Save  £iven  the  true  and  evident 
Lason  why,  when  some  six  hundred  BiSiops  from  ^e  end^^^ 
Omrch  were  gathered  together,  tliey  defined  the  Infallibility  oi 
their  Head—"  Visum  est  Bpiriiui  Sancto  ei  nobu. 


CONCLUSION. 

And  now  there  only  remains  for  me  the  hardest  and  saddest 
part  of  the  task,  whicll  has  not  been  sought  by  me.  but  has  been 
fc^ed  upon  me.  A  few  months  ago  I  could^  not  have  believed 
that  I  should  have  ever  written  these  pages,  I  have  never  written 
liny  with  more  pain,  and  none  of  them  have  cost  me  so  much  as 
that  which  1  am  about  to  write.  .„i.:^f 

Thus  Ikr  I  have  endeavored  to  confine  mvself  »«  *he  subj^^ 
matter  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  pamphlet;  but  before  I  c>id,^^*«f* 
bound  by  an  imperative  duty  to  lay  before  him,  in  behalf  of  his 

♦  Acts  ii.  21. 


CONCLUSION. 


211 


Catholic  fellow-countrymen,  the  nature  of  the  act  which  he  has 
done. 

He  ha«  not  only  invited,  but  instigated  Catholics  to  rise  against 
the  Divine  authority  of  the  Catholic  Church.  He  has  endeavored 
to  create  divisions  among  them.  If  Mr.  Gladstone  does  not  be- 
lieve the  authority  of  the  Catholic  Church  to  be  Divine,  he  knows 
that  they  do. 

If  he  thinks  such  a  rising  to  be  "moral  and  mental  freedom," 
he  knows  that  they  believe  it  to  be  what  his  own  Litany  calls 
•'  schism,  heresy,  and  deadly  sin."  If  he  believes  religious  separa- 
tions to  be  lawful,  he  knows  that  thev  believe  them  to  be  violations 
of  the  Divine  law.  I  am  compellecl  therefore  to  say  that  this  is 
at  least  an  act  of  signal  rashness. 

No  man  has  watched  Mr.  Gladstone's  career  as  a  statesman 
with  a  more  generous  and  disinterested  good-will  than  I  have. 
No  one  has  more  gladly  appreciated  his  gifts;  no  one  has  more 
equitably  interpreted  certain  acts  of  his  political  life,  nor  has 
hailed  his  successes  with  greater  joy.  But  when  he  casts  off  the 
character  of  a  statesman,  for  which  he  has  shown  so  great  ca- 

Eacity.  to  play  the  Canonist  and  Theologian,  for  which  he  has 
ere  shown  so  little,  and  that  with  the  intent  of  sowing  discord 
and  animosities  among  six  millions  of  his  fellow-countrymen — 
and,  I  must  moreover  add,  with  an  indulgence  of  unchastened 
language  rarely  to  be  equalled — I  feel  bound  to  say  that  he  has 
been  betrayed  into  an  act  for  which  1  can  find  no  adequate  ex- 
cuse. I  must  tell  him  that  if  he  would  incline  the  Catholics  of 
the  Empire  to  accept  the  ministries  of  his  compassion,  he  must 
first  purify  his  style  both  of  writing  and  of  thinking.  Catholics 
are  not  to  be  convinced  or  persuaded  by  such  phrases  as  "  the 
present  perilous  Pontificate;  "the  Papal  chair,  its  aiders  and 
abettors;"  "the  great  hierarchic  power  and  those  who  have 
egged  it  on ; "  "  the  present  degradation  of  the  Episcopal  order;  " . 
"the  subserviency  or  pliability  of  the  Council;  "  "hideous  mum- 
mies ;  "  "  head-quarters ;  "  "  the  follies  of  Ecclesiastical  power ;  " 
"foreign  arrogance;"  "the  myrmidons  of  the  Apostolic  Cham- 
ber;" "the  foreign  influence  of  a  caste."  I  transcribe  these 
words  from  his  pages  with  repugnance ;  not,  indeed,  for  our  sake 
against  whom  they  are  leveled,  but  for  the  statesman  who  has 
thought  them  fitting.  Mr.  Gladstone  can  do  many  things ;  but 
he  can  not  do  all  things.  He  has  a  strong  hand  j  but  there  is  a 
bow  which  he  can  not  bend.  He  has  here  tried  his  hand  at  a 
task  for  which,  without  something  more  than  mere  literarv  knowl- 
edge, even  his  varied  gifts  will  not  suffice.  This  Expostulation  is, 
as  I  have  already  said,  an  act  out  of  all  harmony  and  proportion 
with  a  great  statesman's  life. 

I  have  written  these  words  with  a  painful  constraint;  but,  cost 
what  it  may,  duty  must  be  done,  and  I  believe  it  to  be  my  duty  to 
record  this  judgment,  in  behalf  of  the  Catholics  of  this  country, 
on  an  act  unjust  in  itself,  and  therefore  not  only  barren  of  all 
good  results,  but  charged  with  gra\^e  public  dancers. 

But,  I  can  not  break  off  with  a  note  so  cheerless.  If  this  Ex- 
postulation has  cast  down  many  hopes  both  of  a  public  and  pri- 


i 


212 


(kJnclusion. 


APraKDlOES. 


213 


mk  kind,  we  can  not  altogether  remt  ite  publication,  ^f  ««ch 
mistruits  and  misconceptions  existed  in  the  minds  of  our  fellow- 
Biibjccts  the  sooner  and  the  more  openly  they  were  made  public 
the  better.    We  are  not  content  to  be  ^^l^^^*;;^  *^  «"7«^,^^^^^^ 

frous  persons,  or  to  be  set  at  large  upon  good  behavior.  W  e  tnanK 
r.  GlSstone  for  gaining  us  the  liearing  which  we  have Jiad 
before  the  public  justice  of  our  country;  and  we  are  confident 
that  his  impeachment  will  be  withdrawn.  His  own  mind  is  too 
large,  too  just,  and  too  upright  to  refuse  to  acknowledge  an  error 
when  he  sees  that  he  has  Seen  misled.^  It  i\^^^  ''j^'^J't 
too  accurate  not  to  perceive  that  such  is  no7,*J«  «^*-  *  !J®  l^ 
this  the  augury  of  a  happier  and  more  peaceful  future  than  if  this 
momentiry  conflict  hai  never  arisen.  We  shall  all  understand 
each  other  better.    Our  civil  and  religious  peace  at  home  wiU  be 

firmer  by  this  trial.  ...        xi.*  x 

If  the  Veat  German  Empire  shall  only  learn  in  time,  thirteen 
millions  of  contented  Catholic  subiects,  reconciled  as  they  siU 
may  be  by  a  return  of  just  laws,  will  give  a  support  to  its  unity 

which  nothing  can  shake.  ^„*:^«  »t  • 

If  ItJily  shall  only  come  to  see  that  the  "  Roman  question  is. 
and  forever  will  be,  a  source  of  weakness,  contention,  and  dan- 
ger to  its  welfare;  and.  seeing  this,  shall  solve  it  peacefuUy,  as 
ftalv  alone  can  do.  by  undoing  its  un-Catholic  and  therefore  un- 
Italian  policy,  then  its  unity  and  independence  will  be  aecured 
by  the  spontaneous  cooperation  of  a  united  people,  gatiiered 
abound  tte  center  of  all  its  Christian  glories.  S«ch  a  solution 
would  then  be  consecrated  by  the  highest  sanctions  of  its  faith. 
If  wise  counsels  prevail,  and  wise  friends  of  Italy  shall  gain  its 
ear.  it  may  be  agpiin  what  once  it  was,  the  foremost  people  in 

the  Christian  world.  , ,    . ,    «      .  !*..«., 

And,  lastly,  for  ourselves,  our  world-wide  Empire  can  not  torn 
back  upon  its  path  without  disintegration.  It  is  bound  together. 
Bol  by  material  force,  but  by  the  moral  bond  of  lust  laws  and 
m  gM  consent  of  a  free  people.  But  justice  and  freedom  can 
iiotl>e  put  asunder.  They  flow  from  one  source ;  they  can  bo 
kept  pure  only  by  the  same  stream.  They  have  <^^^^ ^^;^Jl^^.^^ 
from  our  Christfanity.  Divided  as  we  are^  5«  ^'J*/ J.^'"*"^^ 
people  stitt    By  religious  conflict  our  Christianity  will  wa^te 

Way  m  a  moth  fretting  a  garment  ?y. '^'*«*T  KPr^!;^tnlnv 
is  true,  and  wise,  and  just,  and  Christian,  will  be  perpetually 
multiplied,  binding  indisaolubly  in  one  all  men  and  all  races  of 
our  Imperial  Commonwealth, 


appe:ndioes. 


APPENDIX  A. 
Inkocbntius  III.  PR^r.ATis  PER  Feanciam  oonstitutis.    a.  d.  1200. 

NovitlUe,  qui  nihil  ignorat:  €<«•»/'•«• 

Non  putet  aliquis,  quod  jurisdictionem  lUustris  Regis  Franco- 
rum  perturbare,  aut  minuere  intendamus,  cum  ipse  jurisdictionem 
nostram  nee  velit,  nee  debeat  impedire.  Sed  cum  Dominus  dicat 
in  Evancelio,  "  Si  pereaverit  in  te  frater  tuus,  vade  et  corripe  eum 
inter  teet  ipsum  solum:  si  te  audierit,  lucratus  ens  fratrem 
tuum ;  si  te  non  audierit,  adhibe  tecum  unum  vel  duos,  ut  in  ore 
duorum  vel  trium  testium  stet  omne  verbum.  Quod  si  te  non  au- 
dierit die  Ecclesiae:  si  autem  Ecclesiam  non  audierit,  sit  tibe  si- 
cut  ethnicus  ct  publicanus."  *  Et  Rex  Angliae^  sit  paratus  suf- 
ficienter  ostendere,  quod  Rex  Francorum  peccat  in  ipsim,  et 
ipse  circa  eum  in  correctione  processit  secundum  re^ulam  Evan- 
gelioam,  et  tandem  quia  nullo  modo  profecit,  dixit  Hicclesias. 
Quomodo  nos,  qui  sumus  ad  regimen  universalis  Ecclesiae  superna 
dispositione  vocati.  mandatum  divinum  possumus  non  exaudire,  ut 
non  procedamua  secundum  formam  ipsius?  Nisi  forsitan  ipse 
coram  nobis,  vel  Legato  nostro,  sufficientem  in  contrarium 
rationem  ostendat.  Non  enim  intendimus  judtcare  defeudo,  cu- 
ius ad  ipsum  special  judicium :  nisi  forte  jure  communi  per 
speciale  privilegium,  vel  contrariam  consuetudinem  aliquid  sit 
detractum :  sed  decernere  de  peccato,  cujus  ad  nos  pertmei  sine 
dubitatione  censura,  quam  in  quemlibef  exercere  possumus  et  de- 
Ifctnus  .    .     .    Cum  enim  non  humanae  constitutioni,  sed 

divin»  potius  innitamur,  quia  potestas  nostra  non  est  ex  hominc, 
Bed  ex  Deo.  nullus  qui  sit  sanae  mentis  ignorat,  qum  ad  officium 
nostrum  spectet  de  quocunque  mortali  peccato  corripere  quem- 
libct  Christianum :  et  si  correctionem  contempserit,  per  distric- 
tionem  ecclesiasticam  coercere.     Sed  forsan  dicetur,  quod  aliter 


BONIFACIUS  VIII.,  AD  PBEPBTDA31  RKI  MeMORIAM.      A.  D.  1302. 

Unam  Sanctam  Ecclesiam  Catholicam  et  ipsam  Apostolicam  ur- 
eente  fide  credere  cogimur  et  tenere.  Nosque  hanc  hrmiter  cred- 
imus  et  simpliciter  confitemur:  extra  quam  nee  salus  est,  nee  re- 
missio  peccitorum,  Sponso  in  Canticis  proclamante.  "Una  est  co- 


*Matt.  xviii.  15-17. 


|-Deut.  i.  17. 


214 


AJTinuf'l/IUBB* 


M 


lumba  mea,  pcrfecta  mea:  mia  est  matri  sum,  electa  gen  itrici 
•u»:"*  quae  anum  corpus  uiYstioum  rcpraesentat,  cojus  caput 
Cliristue,  Christ!  vero  Deus.  id  ^ua  unus  Dominus,  una  fides, 
uniun  liaptisiiia.t  Una  nempe  fuit  Diluvii  tempore  area  Noe, 
unaiu  Ecclesiam  prsefigurans.  quo)  in  uno  cubito  consammata,! 
UEiim,  Noe  videlicet,  gubcrnatorem  habuit  et  rectorem,  extra 

Stam  omnis  subsistentia  super  terrain  legimus  fuisse  deleta. 
ane  autem  veneramur  et  umoam;  dicente  Domino  in  Propheta, 
**  Erue  a  framea,  Deus,  animam  meam  et  de  manu  canis  unicam 
moam; "  {  pro  anima  enim,  id  est,  pro  seipso  capite  simul  oravit 
el  corpore:  quod  corpus  unicam  scilicet  Ecclesiam  nominavit, 
propter  sfODsii  fi<^ei,  sacramentorum  et  charitatis  Ecclesiis  uni- 
telein.  £^  est  tunica  ilia  Domini  incon8utilis,||  quse  scissa  non 
full  sed  sorte  provenii  Igitur  EccIesisB  unius  et  unicse  unum 
corpus,  unum  caput,  non  duo  capita  quasi  monstrum,  Christus 
videlicet^  et  Christi  vicarius  Petrus  Petrique  successor;  dicente 
Domino  ipsi  Petro,  "Pasce  oves  meas,"1[  "meas,"  inquit,  et  ge- 
neraliler  non  singulariter  has  vel  illas,  per  quod  cpmmisisse  sibi 
intelligitur  universas.  Sive  ergo  Graeci,  sivi  alii  se  dicant  Petro 
dusque  suecessoribus  non  esse  commissos,  fateantur  necesse  se 
de  ovibus  Christi  non  esse;  dicente  Domino  in  Joanne  "unum 
oVile  et  unicum  essee  pastorem."**  In  hac  ejusque  potestate 
duos  mm  gladios,  spiritualem  videlicet  et  temporalem,  Evangeli- 
cis  dictii  instruimur.  Nam  dicentibus  Apostolis,  "Ecce  gladii 
duo  hic,"tt  ^^  Ecclesia  scilicet,  cum  Apostoli  loquerentur,  non 
respondit  Dominus  nimis  esse  sed  satis.  Certe  qui  in  potestate 
Petri  temporalem  gladium  esse  negat,  male  verbum  attendit  dom- 
ini  proferentis,  "  Con verte  gladium  tuum  in  vaginam."  I]:  Uter- 
fue  ergo  est  in  potestate  Ecclesiae,  spiritualis  scilicet  gladius  et 
insleriaHs.  Sed  is  quidem  pro  Ecclesia,  ille  vero  ab  Ecclesia  ex- 
ercendus.  lUe  sacerdotis,  is  manu  rcgum  et  militum,  sed  ad  nu- 
tum  et  patientiam  sacerdotis.  Oportet  autem  gladium  esse  sub 
gladio  et  temporalem  auctoritatem  spirituali  subjici  potestati: 
nam  cum  dicat  Apostolus,  "  Non  est  potestas  nisi  a  Deo,  quse  au- 
tem sunt  a  Deoordinata  sunt;  "  §§  non  autem  ordinata  essent,  nisi 
gladius  esset  sub  gladio,  et  tanquam  inferior  reduceretur  per 
iilium  in  suprema.  Nam  secundum  beatum  Dionjsium,  lex  di- 
Ymitatis  est,  infirma  per  media  in  suprema  reduci.  Non  ergo  se- 
cundum ordinem  universi  omnia  sB^ue  ac  immediate,  sed  infima 
per  media  el  inferiora  per  supenora  ad  ordinem  reducuntur. 
Bpiriluiaem  autem  et  dignitate  et  nobilitate  terrenam  quamlibet 
prtMeilere  potestatem,  oportet  tanto  clarius  nos  fateri  quanto 
gpiriluiillii  temporalia  antecellunt.  Quod  etiam  ex  decimarum 
datione,  et  benedictione,  et  sanctificatione,  ex  ipsius  potestatis 
acceptione,  ex  ipsaram  rerum  ^bernatione  claris  oculis  intuo- 
niur.  Nam  veritate  testante,  spiritualis  potestas  terrenam  potes- 
latem  instituere  habet  et  judicare,  si  bona  non  fuerit,  sic  ae  Eo- 


APPEKDICB5. 


215 


*Oant-  Tl.  8. 

IBuilm  zxi.  21. 
*Joann.  x.  16. 
1}  Bom.  ziii,  1. 


tEph.  IV.  6- 

I  Joann.  xix.  38,  24. 

ft  Luc.  xxii.  38. 


t  Oen.  vi.  16. 
f  Joann.  xxL  17. 
tl  Matt  xxvi.  52. 


clesia  et  ecclesiastica  potestate  verificatur  vaticinium  Hieremica3 : 
"  Ecce  constitui  te  hodie  super  gentes  et  regna,"  *  et  csetera  quae 
sequntur.  Ergo  si  deviat  terrena  potestas,  judicabitur  a  potes- 
tate spirituali,  sed  si  deviat  spiritualis  minor  a  suo  superiori :  si 
vero  suprema,  a  solo  Deo,  non  ab  homine  poterit  judicari,  tes- 
tante Apostolo,  *'  Spiritualis  homo  judicat  omnia,  ipse  autem  a 
nemine  judicatur."  f  Est  autem  haec  auctoritas,  etsi  data  sit 
homini  et  exerceatur  per  hominem,  non  humana,  sed  potius  di- 
vina,  ore  divino  Petro  aata,  sibique  suisque  suecessoribus  in  ipso, 
quem  confessus  fuit  petra  firmata,  dicentie'  Domino  ipsi  Petro, 
*'  Quodcunque  ligaveris,"  |  etc.  Quicuncjue  igitur  huic  potestati 
a  Deo  sic  ordinatae  resistit,  Dei  ordinationi  re8i8tit,§  nisi  duo  si- 
cut  Man  ichaaus  fingat  esse  principia :  quod  falsum  et  hasreticum 
judicamus :  quia  testante  Moyse,  non  m  principiis,  sed  in  prin- 
cipio  coelum  Deus  creavit  et  terram.||  Porro  subesse  Romano' 
Pontifici  omni  humanas  creaturas  declaramus,  dicimus,  definimus 
et  pronunciamus  omnio  esse  de  necessitate  salutis. 

^tum  Laterani  xiv  kal.  Decembris,  pontificatus  nostri  anno 
octavo. 

Corpus  Juris  Canonici.  Extrav.  Commun.  lib.  i. 
Be  Majoritaie  et  Obediential  cap.  i. 


Clbmentis  v.  Diploma,    a.  d.  1306. 

Clemens  Episcopus,  etc.     Ad  perpetuam  rei  memoriam. 

Meruit  carissimi  filii  nostri  Piiilippi  regis  Francorum  illustris 
sinceras  devotionis  ad  nos  et  Ecclesiam  Komanam  integritas,  et 
progenitorum  suorum  praeclara  merita  meruerunt,  meruit  insuper 
fida  regnicolarum  pietas,  ac  devotionis  sinceritas,  ut  tam  regnum 

a  nam  regem  favore  benevolo  prosequamur.  Hinc  est  quod  nos 
icto  regi  et  regno  per  definitionem  sen  declarationem  bonse  me- 
moriae Bonifacii  PP.  VIII.  praedecessoris  nostri,  quae  incipit 
Unam  nanctam,  nullum  volumus  vel  intendimus  praejudicium 
generari.  Nee  quod  per  illam  rex,  regnum,  regnicolae  praelibati 
amplius  Ecclesiae  sint  subjecti  quam  antea  existebant.  Sed  om- 
nia intelligantur  in  eodem  esse  statu  quo  erant  ante  definitionem 
prasfatam,  tam  quantum  ad  Ecclesiam  quam  etiam  quod  regem  et 
regnum  et  superius  nominatos. 

Datum  Lugduni  kalendis  Februarii,  pontificatus  nostri  anno 
prime. 

Labbe,  Concilia,  sub  ann.  1305,  tom.  xiv.  p.  1374, 

ed.  Ven.  1731. 


♦Hier.  i.  10. 
I  Rom.  ziii.  2. 


tl  Cor  ii.  15. 
I  Oen.  L  1. 


I  Matt.  xvi.  19. 


210 


DICES. 


I 


APPENDIX  B, 


Mtimd  from  the  Eneyduxd  Ldter  of  Oregory  XVI.  "Mirari  Votf* 

AttguMi  15|  18%^. 

As  we  have  learned  that  oertain  writings  spread  abroad  among 
tiie  people  publish  doctrines  which  destroy  the  loyaltT  and  sub- 
aiMon  due  to  princes,  and  kindle  everywhere  the  torch  of  civU 
discord,  we  have  to  take  especial  care  that  the  nations  may  not 
be  deoeiTed  thereby,  and  led  away  from  the  right  path.  Let  all 
bear  in  mind,  according  to  the  words  of  the  Apostle,  that  •'  there 
is  no  power  but  from  God,  and  those  that  are  ordained  of  God; 
therefore  he  that  resisteth  the  power  resisteth  the  ordinance  of 
God,  and  they  that  resist  purchase  to  themselves  damnation."  * 

Wherefore  both  divine  and  human  laws  cry  out  against  those 
who,  by  basely  plotting  civil  discord  and  sedition,  abandon  their 
allegiance  to  their  princes  and  unite  to  drive  them  from  their 
ihnines. 

For  this  reason,  to  avoid  so  base  a  crime,  it  is  a  well-known 
fact  that  the  first  Christians,  in  the  midst  of  nersecutions,  ren- 
dered meritorious  service  to  their  Emperors  ana  to  the  safety  of 
the  Empire.  This  they  showed  by  the  clearest  proofs,  not  only 
in  fulilling  with  all  loyalty  and  {promptitude  all  that  was  com- 
manded them  not  contrary  to  their  religion,  but  by  persevering 
therein  even  to  shedding  their  blood  in  battle  for  them. 

"  Christian  soldiers,"  says  8t  Augustine,  "  served  an  unbeliev- 
ing Emperor,  but  when  the  cause  of  Christ  was  in  question, 
they  auknowledged  only  Him  who  is  in  Heaven.  They  distin- 
giisliod  between  the  Eternal  Lord  and  a  temporal  lord,  and  were 
nevertheless  subject  to  the  temporal  for  the  sake  of  their  Eternal 
Lord."  t 

St  Maurice,  the  invincible  martyr,  the  captain  of  the  Theban 
Legion,  had  this  before  his  eyes  when,  as  8t.  Eucherius  relates, 
he  gave  his  answer  to  the  Emperor : — "  We  are  your  soldiers,  O 
Emperor,  but  nevertheless,  we  are  free  to  confess,  the  servants 
of  God.  .  .  .  And  now  we  are  not  driven  into  rebellion,  even 
to  ame  our  lives,  for  here  we  have  arms  in  our  hands,  and  we  do 
not  fight,  because  we  have  the  will  to  die  rather  than  to  slay." 

This  loyalty  of  the  first  Christians  to  their  princes  is  the  more 
ennipicuous  if  we  consider  with  TertuUian,  that  Christians  at 
that  lime  "  were  not  wanting  in  numbers  and  strength  if  they 
bad  wished  for  open  war.  We  are  but  of  yesterday,  and  we  ar^ 
found  ©very-where  among  you,  in  your  cities,  islands,  strong- 
holds, towns,  public  places,  in  your  camns,  your  tribes,  your  com- 
panies, in  your  palaces,  your  senate,  ana  your  forum.  .  .  .  For 
what  warfare  should  we  not  have  been  able  and  willing,  even  at 
mat  odds,  who  so  readily  offer  ourselves  to  death,  if  our  religion 
did  not  oblige  us  rather  to  die  than  to  slay  ?  .  .  .  If  we,  so 
larpe  a  number  as  wo  aro,  had  broken  away  from  you  and  gone 

tRom.  xiii.  2.  fSt  August,  m  Pmdm  cxxiv.  n.  7, 


▲PPBNDI0B8. 


217 


to  some  distant  corner  of  the  world,  the  loss  of  so  many  citizens, 
oven  such  as  we  are,  would  have  put  your  empire  to  shame,  nay, 
would  have  punished  you  by  the  very  loss.  Without  doubt  you 
would  have  been  daunted  in  your  solitude.  .  .  .  You  would 
have  asked  over  whom  you  were  ruling:  more  enemies  would 
have  been  left  than  citizens :  but  now  you  have  fewer  enemies, 
owing  to  the  number  of  Christians."  * 

These  luminous  examples  of  immovable  loyalty  to  princes, 
which  necessarily  followed  from  the  holy  precepts  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  at  once  condemn  the  detestable  pride  and  wicked- 
ness of  those  who,  boiling  with  unbridled  lust  for  an  inordinate 
liberty,  are  wholly  engaged  in  destroying  and  tearing  to  pieces 
all  the  rights  of  princes  in  order  to  reduce  the  nations  to  slavery 
under  pretense  of  liberty. — See  Recueil  des  Allocutions  de» 
Souverains  Foniifes.    Paris,  Le  Cl^re,  1865,  pp.  165-6.        * 


For  the  accuracy  of  the  following  statement  I  have  direct  evi- 
dence: 

For  several  years  past  the  Radical  authorities  of  the  Diocese 
of  Basle  have  persecuted  the  Catholic  Church,  as  they  still  con- 
tinue to  do.  Formerly  the  persecution  was  carried  into  eflfect, 
partly  by  violence  and  partly  by  underhand  means ;  but  it  was 
always  specious  and  very  injurious  to  religion.  It  was  invaria- 
bly carried  on  in  the  name  of  progress,  liberty,  and  the  welfare 
of  the  people,  whom  it  pretended  to  free  from  the  tyranny  of  the 
priesthood  and  the  despotism  of  Rome. 

The  Catholic  populations  were  thus  oppressed  by  the  so-called 
omnipotence  of  the  State,  and,  incredible  as  it  would  seem  under 
a  republican  form  of  government,  the  State,  or  rather  a  few  in- 
dividuals acting  in  its  name,  supported  by  a  non-Catholic  ma- 
jority, and- backed  by  the  Radical  element,  have  succeeded  in 
monopolizing  power,  and  in  maintaining  themselves  in  it  by  ter- 
rorism and  bribenr  for  a  length  of  years,  assuming  to  themselves 
the  functions  of  the  Holy  See  and  the  Episcopate,  and  so  adding 
to  their  temporal  rule  the  spiritual  government  of  souls.  Not 
only  have  they  possessed  themselves  of  the  direction  of  all  pub- 
lic schools,  and  of  the  administration  of  all  pious  foundations, 
but  they  have  destroyed  all  the  monastic,  capitular,  and  ecclesi- 
astical institutions,  claimed  the  right  to  regulate  the  parochial 
system,  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  catechising,  confessions,  first 
communions  of  children,  the  celebration  of  public  worship,  pro- 
cessions, burials  and  benedictions,  and  even  extended  their  juris- 
diction to  matrimonial  causes.  More  than  this,  by  the  Federal 
Constitution,  which  the  recent  revolutionary  laws  have  just  ex- 

*  TertuUian  in  Apolog.  cap.  xxxvii. 
19 


21.8 


AM»K?rDI0'E8. 


AFFEXDICES, 


aI  <l 


i 


N* 


tended  to  the  Catholic  cantons,  contrarj  to  the  will  of  the  popu- 
Ittions  OS  expressed  by  the  vote  of  an  immense  majority,  the 
State  has  virtually  and  insidiously  suppressed  the  Catholic 
Church  by  the  introduction  of  that  article  of  the  Federal  Cod© 
by  which  the  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  is  abolished.     (Art.  58^. 

iinjilly,  in  five  cantons  of  the  Diocese  of  Basle,  the  Catholic 
pcipnlittloiis  have  lost  all  liberty  of  worship  in  a  more  or  less 
degree. 

Since  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  more  especially,  the  war 
aicainst  the  Church  has  been  waged  with  greater  acrimony  in  the 
lliiMsese  of  Basle,  and  since  the  victories  of  Prussia,  our  enemies 
hme  acted  more  openly.  The  five  governments  of  Soleure,  Ar- 
jovie,  Basle-Cam pagne,  Berne,  and  Tliur^ovie  have  sent  their  del- 
agate  to  an  assembly  calling  itself  a  Diocesan  Conference,  com- 
posea,  not  of  ecclesiastics,  but  In  great  part  of  Protestants,  and 
of  lay-Catholics  notoriously  hostile  to  the  Church.  8uch  a  bodj, 
of  course,  possessed  no  legal  authority,  but  notwithstanding  its 
patent  incapacity,  it  committed,  among  many  other  illegal  and 
unjust  acts,  that  of  pronouncing  a  sentence  of  deprivation  against 
the  Bishop  of  Basle,  on  the  29th  of  January,  1873.  The  princi- 
pill  offense  imputed  to  him  was,  that  of  having  published  the  def- 
inition of  Papal  Infallibility  in  his  diocese,  and  of  having  refused 
ti>  withdraw  the  publication.  Several  minor  accusations  were 
brought  against  him ;  but  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  authori- 
ties were  unable  to  prove  that  he  had  violated  a  single  law  during 
the  whole  course  or  his  episcopate.  Ho  was  therefore  deprived 
of  his  see  solely  because  he  had  fulfilled  the  duties  of  a  Catholic 
bishop,  and  because  h©  would  not  separate  himself  from  the  Unity 
of  the  Holy  See,  by  refusing  to  publish  the  decrees  of  the  Vatican 
Council. 

Since  the  above  attack  on  the  liberties  of  the  Catholic  popula- 
tions, the  Holy  See,  and  the  Church,  a  scries  of  laws  favoring 
BOliiBm  and  apostasy  have  been  passed  by  the  five  cantonal  gov- 
emmenta  in  question.  They  have  forbidden  the  Bishop  of  Basle 
to  exercise  his  episcopal  charge  throughout  the  five  oantons  coni- 
posing  his  diocese;  and  they  have  also  forbidden  the  clergy  to 
nmintfiin  any  official  relations  with  him,  so  that  the  faithful  suffer 
grievous  injury  in  their  most  sacred  rights,  and  in  their  most  ur- 

fent  religious  needs,  in  common  with  the  whole  Catholic  priest- 
ood,  which  has  been  |>uni8hed  in  all  the  cantons  for  having  pro- 
tested against  these  unjust  acts. 

But  it  is  the  Protestant  Canton  of  Berne  which  hfis  signalized 
ilMlf  beyond  all  others  by  its  despotism  and  its  cruelty.  It  has 
iUipended  all  the  parish  priests  of  the  canton  from  their  pastoral 
functions,  and  has  since  then  deprived  them,  as  well  as  all  their 
curates,  to  the  number  of  sixty-nine.  It  next  pronounced  sen- 
tence of  exile  on  tlie  whole  clergy,  ninety  in  number,  only  except- 
ing five  or  six  aj^ed  priests,  who  were,  however,  forbidden  to  say 
nfiM  lave  in  their  own  rooms,  or  in  any  way  to  exercise  their  sacred 
ministry.  The  government  then  drove  all  the  priests  out  of  their 
ehurches  and  presbyteries,  and  confiscated  all  their  benefices  and 
tevenues,  so  tnat  they  are  deprived  of  all  means  of  subsistence. 


Before  the  sentence  of  exile  was  carried  out,  many  of  them  were 
moreover  punished  by  fine  and  imprisonment.  The  Catholic  laity 
has  suffered  there,  and  still  has  to  suffer  from  every  kind  of  injust- 
ice: fines,  imprisonment,  dismissal  from  public  employment,  are 
common  occurrences,  and  men,  women,  nuns,  and  even  children 
have  been  imprisoned  for  their  faith. 

There  are,  at  the  present  moment,  more  than  60,000  Catholics 
in  the  Canton  of  Berne,  who  are  deprived,  as  far  as  State  influ- 
ence can  effect  it,  of  all  religious  help,  whether  in  life  or  in  death, 
the  exiled  priests  of  the  Bernese  Jura  being  arrested  and  cast  into 
prison  if  discovered  within  the  cantonal  limits. 

The  immense  majority  of  the  people,  however,  remain  firmly 
attached  to  their  pastors.  In  many  parishes  not  a  schismatic  is 
to  be  found,  and  in  others,  containing  a  numerous  population,  the 
exceptions  are  very  few.  In  a  word,  the  Catholics  of  the  Bernese 
Jura  maintain  their  fidelity  to  the  faith  of  their  fathers,  and  the 
only  partisans  of  the  schism  are  apostates  or  persons  long  notori- 
ously hostile  to  the  Church. 

But  the  most  revolting  feature  of  the  present  persecution  is  that 
the  Government  of  Berne  has  sought  in  every  part  of  Europe  for- 
eign priests  in  order  to  replace  the  lawfully  appointed  clergy  of 
the  Jura.  It  has  succeeded  in  finding  a  certain  number  o?  sus- 
pended or  apostate  priests,  who  have  consented  to  act  as  the  in- 
struments of  State  persecution.  During  the  fourteen  months 
which  have  witnessed  the  exile  of  the  sixty-nine  faithful  parish 
clergy,  twenty-five  strangers  have  been  brought  to  replace  them. 
These  men  are  of  the  worst  moral  antecedente.  The  government, 
notwithstanding,  has  imposed  them  on  the  parishioners,  gives 
them  profuse  supplies  of  money,  makes  over  the  churches  and 
presbyteries  to  them,  and  supports  them  in  every  way,  while  the 
native  clergy  are  despoiled  and  exiled. 

The  Catholics  of  the  Jura  being  thus  deprived  of  their  pastors, 
meet  in  farms  or  outhouses  for  coinmon  worship;  and  yet  even 
this  liberty  is  not  always  conceded  to  them.  It  is  only  in  pro- 
found secret  they  can  receive  the  sacraments,  or  hear  mass,  and 
they  even  bury  their  own  dead  without  the  assistance  of  a  priest. 
It*is  thus  that  religious  animosity,  making  common  cause  with 
Radicalism,  tyrannizes  over  its  tellow-citizens,  who  commit  no 
offense  against  the  public  peace,  and  who  bear  their  proportion- 
ate share  of  the  public  burdens ! 

By  the  course  it  has  pursued  the  Government  of  Berne  has  vio- 
lated the  treaties  and  constitutions  which  protect  Catholic  liber- 
ties within  the  cantons.  In  order  to  give  a  color  of  legality  to 
future  persecutions,  it  has  voted  a  new  Ecclesiastical  Constitution, 
expressly  framed  against  the  interests  of  the  Catholic  Church  in 
Switzerland,  and  which  it  has  imposed,  against  their  will,  on  the 
Catholics  of  Berne  by  a  preponderent  non-Catholic  majority. 

One  consolation  remains  to  us,  namely,  the  fidelity  of  the  en- 
tire body  of  clergy  to  the  Catholic  Church.  They  have  freely 
chosen  to  lose  all  rather  than  betray  their  faith. 

In  order  to  perpetuate  the  supply  of  schismatic  or  "Old  Cath- 
olic "  priests,  the  Government  has  recently  established  a  faculty 


220 


APFKN  DICES. 


I 

i 


II 


of  theology  in  Berne.  It  has  brought  professors  from  Gennany, 
either  Protestants  or  apostate  priests,  and  has  indnced  a  small 
number  of  students  to  follow  the  courses,  by  paying  them  highly 
for  their  attendance. 

In  Soleure,  too,  the  Radical  authorities  carry  on  the  same  per- 
secution of  the  Catholics  of  the  cantons.  The  government  has 
succeeded  in  placing  three  schism atical  priests  m  as  many  par- 
ishes. It  has  suppressed  and  confiscated  the  celebrated  and  an- 
cient abbey  of  the  Benedictines  at  Mariastein  and  the  Chapters  of 
Schoennenwerth  and  of  the  Bishopric  of  Basle  at  Soleure.  In  the 
other  mixed  cantons  where  the  anti-Catholic  Badicals  are  in  a 
majority,  the  Catholics  have  much  to  suffer. 

The  Diocese  of  Basle  includes  seven  cantons— viz.  Soleure,  Ar- 

fwie,  Thurgovie,  Basle-Campagne,  Berne,  Lucerne,  and  Zug. 
he  two  last-named  cantons  are  Catholic,  and  possess  a  just  gov- 
ernment. In  the  other  cantons  the  majority  is  Protestant.  To 
these  must  be  added  the  city  of  Basle  and  the  canton  of  Schaff- 
hausen,  both  of  which  form  part  of  the  same  diocese. 

The  Diocese  of  Basle  comprises  430,000  Catholics  and  800,000 
Protestants  and  other  denominations.  It  contains  800  priests, 
only  seven  of  whom  have  become  Old  Catholics.  The  so-called 
Diocesan  Conference  has  pushed  its  pretensions  to  the  point  of 
prescribing  what  authors  are  to  be  used  by  ecclesiastical  students 
in  the  seminary !  The  bishop  was  not  even  free  to  appoint  the 
superior  and  his  assistants,  but  was  obliged  to  obtain  the  "Placet" 
of  the  State  for  such  nominations,  as  well  as  for  his  Pastoral 
Letters. 


[FBOM  THK  LONDON  WBBKLT  KE6I8TEB.] 

INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  POPE. 

BY  THE   RIGHT   REV.    MONSIGNOR  CAFEL,   D.D. 


Though  a  blow  is  dealt  us  through  the  Ritualists,  and  a  severe 
judgment  passed  on  the  converts  in  Mr.  Gladstone's  pamphlet, 
yet  the  real  stumbling-block  of  offense  on  our  part  is  that,  ac- 
cording to  him,  ever  since  1870  we  have  accepted  the  infallibility 
of  the  Pope.  This  wonderful  "  change  in  the  constitution  of  the 
Latin  Church"  sorely  distresses  the  author,  and  leads  him  to  say 
that  Rome  "  has  substituted  for  the  proud  boast  of  semper  eadein 
a  policy  of  violence  and  change  in  faith."  Yet,  as  though  for- 
getful of  so  writing,  he  proceeds  to  the  contradictory  assertion 
that  the  Church  "  has  refurbished  and  paraded  anew  every  rusty 
tool  which  she  was  fondly  thought  to  have  disused."  With  this 
definite  accusation  we  wish,  therefore,  to  deal. 

We  have  to  remember  that  previous  to  1870  every  Catholic 
was  bound  to  believe : — 

1.  That  the  gift  of  infallibility  was  given  to  the  Church  of 
God;  that  Church  being  none  other  than  the  communion  under 
the  authority  of  the  See  of  Rome. 

2.  That  this  gift  of  infallibility  was  exercised  both  by  the 
teaching  body  of  the  Church  united  to  its  head,  whether  that 
Church  was  dispersed  throughout  the  world,  or  assembled  in 
General  Council. 

By  this  no  Catholic  meant  to  imnly  that  infallibility  was  iden- 
tical with  inspiration,  much  less  that  the  Church  was  snotless, 
either  in  its  individual  pastors  or  in  its  head,  but  onlv  that  the 
Spirit  of  God  so  overruled  her  utterances  that  she  could  not  teach 
the  faithful  any  thing  at  variance  with  the  truth.  As  to  the  ob- 
ject or  sphere  of  this  infallibility,  every  Catholic  was  further 
bound  to  believe  that  it  extended  to  all  truths  bearing  upon  faith 
and  the  eternal  welfare  of  mankind ;  or,  in  other  words,  to  the 
whole  of  faith  and  morals.  Every  instructed  Catholic  further 
knew  and  held  that  the  belief  ex  animo  in  these^  discussions  of 
the  Church  was  the  primary  and  necessary  condition  for  his  com- 
munion with  her.  He  believed,  however,  that  until  she  spoke  he 
had  a  perfect  right  to  discuss  undecided  questions,  but  always 
subject  to  the  suppressed  premise  in  his  mind  that  he  would  obey 
whatever  she  would  declare. 

Now,  we  ask  what  change  after  the  decision  by  the  Vatican 

(221) 


jC^' jS' 


IKFALLIBILITY  OF  THK  POPE, 


INFALLIBILITr  OF  THE  POPE. 


223 


It 

I 
I 


h 


R^ 


Council  was  effected  in  the  creed  of  a  Catholic?  None  as  to  tlie 
pift  of  infallibility;  none  as  to  the  ohject  of  infallibility ;  none  as 
to  the  double  exercise  of  the  infallibility  mentioned;  but  only 
that  the  ex  cathedra,  or  official  utt^niueei  of  the  Head  of  the 
Church,  were  so  directed  by  the  Holy  Ghost  that  they  could  not 
be  at  Yariance  with  the  truth.  In  fact,  the  Vatican  Council  de- 
clarea  that  the  Head  of  the  Church  when  teaching  ex  cathedra 
ii  m  unerring  as  she  herself  is  in  General  Council,  or  when  dis- 
persed throughout  the  world.  By  this,  what  had  been  the  un- 
varying practice  of  the  Popes  for  so  many  centuries  was  declared 
to  be  an  infallible  nile  of  action  for  the  Church. 

How,  then,  Mr.  Gladstone  can  assert  that  an  essential  change 
in  her  constitution  lijis  taken  plncc  passes  our  comprehension. 
He  must  be  fully  aware  that  throujjhout  the  long  history  of  the 
Church  of  God  the  Popes  have  not  waited  to  have  their  infalli- 
bility declared,  but  have  acted  m  possessors  of  it,  condemning 
unsound  doctrines  whenever  they  made  their  ai)pcarance,  or  pro- 
claiming truths  anew  when  thev  were  in  danger  of  becoming  oh- 
wured  or  perverted.  Those  wno  obstinately  refused  submission 
to  any  dogmatic  decree  of  the  Sovereign  Pontiff  were  ever  con- 
sidered guilty  of  grave  sin.  It  was  nut  until  the  iifteenth  century 
thai  any  attempt  was  ever  made  to  assert  that  an  appeal  might 
be  made  against  the  Pope's  judgment  to  a  future  (Ecumenical 
Council.  The  promptitade  with  which  the  faithful  assented  to 
Pope  Martin  V.  s  condemnation  of  this  proposition  in  1418  bears 
witness  to  the  sense  of  the  Church  on  this  question.  But  we 
may  pass  from  theory  to  facts. 

Not  to  go  earlier  back  than  the  year  516,  ©verjir  Eastern  Bishop, 
without  exception,  whom  Mr.  Gladstone  would,  in  common  with 
High  Churchmen,  hold  to  have  been  Catholic,  individually  as- 
serted his  belief  that,  by  Christ's  promise,  the  Apostolic  See 
could  not  fail  in  faith,  and  that  communion  with  tne  Catholic 
Church  could  be  defined  by  saying  that  a  person  was  in  har- 
mony r'coii«eii/i>M«")  with  that  See;  and  tnat,  in  so  doing,  ho 
was  following  in  all  things  the  constituti«>ns  of  the  Fathers.  The 
following  is  the  notable  "Kegula  Fidei"  of  Pope  Hormisdas, 
which  was  signed  by  all  the  Eastern  Bishops  who  had  joined  the 
Acacian  schism,  ana  by  the  Emperor  Justinian,  and  by  the  Pa^ 
triarcha  of  Constantinople — Epiphanius,  John,  and  Mennas.  At 
the  8th  General  Council  (and  this  has  the  same  authority  as  the 
fret  four)  no  Bishop  took  his  seat  without  signing  it — mutatis 
mutandis  — the  grounds  of  his  faith  being  identical,  viz.,  the  in- 
fallibility, or,  in  the  language  of  the  day,  the  immaculateness,  by 
Christ's  "promise,  of  the  Faith  of  the  See  of  Peter: — 

"  The  first  condition  of  salvation  is  t4>  hold  firm  the  Rule  of 
tho  true  Faith,  and  in  no  way  to  deviate  from  the  constitutions 
of  the  Fathers.  And  because  the  statement  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  when  He  said,  *  Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will 
build  my  church;  etc..  can  not  be  set  aside;  this,  which  is  said, 
is  provea  by  results,  because  in  the  Apostolic  Sec  religion  has  al 
wavs  been  preserved  undcfiled.  Desirous,  therefore,  by  no  means 
to  be  separated  from  this  hope  and  fuith,  and  following  in  all 


matters  the  constitutions  of  the  Fathers,  we  anathematize  all 
heretics,  especially  .  .  .  ."  Then  follow  certain  heretics  bv 
name  (others  of  the  time  being  substituted  for  them  at  the  8th 
General  Council),  and,  among  them,  ".  .  .  Acacius,  who  per- 
sisted in  their  communion  and  fellowship;  because  he  has  de- 
served a  sentence  like  that  of  those  whose  communion  he  at- 
tached himself  to.  .  .  .  Wherefore  we  receive  and  approve 
of  all  the  General  Epistles  (Epistolas  Univeisns)  of  Pope  Leo, 
wherein  he  wrote  concerning  the  true  religion.  Hence,  as  we 
have  said,  following  in  all  respects  the  Apostolic  See,  and  pub- 
lishing all  its  constitutions,  1  nope  that  1  may  deserve  to  be  in 
the  one  communion  with  you,  which  the  Apostolic  See  proclaims, 
wherein  the  Christian  Religion  is  effectually  and  truly  consol- 
idated (ill  qtid  est  integra  et  mrax  ChruilaiKB  religionis  soUdi- 
tas):  promising,  also,  that  the  names  of  those  who  are  cut  off 
(sequestratos)  from  the  communion  of  the  Catholic  Church;  that 
18,  not  consentient  with  the  Apostolic  See,  shall  not  be  recited 
during  the  sacred  mysteries.  This,  my  profession,  1  have  sub- 
scribed with  my  own  hand,  and  delivered  to  you,  Hormisdas,  the 
holy  and  venerable  Pope  of  the  City  of  Rome."  {In  Matisi.  Col- 
lect, concil,  T.  viii.,  pp.  407,  408.) 

At  this  period  the  rights  of  the  primacy  were  recoj^^nized  by 
imperial  constitutions,  as  in  the  instances  of  Valentinian  and 
Justinian.  "According  to  ancient  custom,"  says  the  law  of  Val- 
entinian, "neither  the  Bishops  of  Gaul  nor  those  of  any  other 
provinces,  may  undertake  any  thing  (that  is,  of  importance  causa 
tnajor)  without  the  authoritv  of  the  venerable  Pope  of  the  Eter- 
nal City.  Whatever,  therefore,  has  been  or  may  be  approved  by 
the  authority  of  the  Apostolic  See,  let  it  be  a  law  for  all. 
'*  The  Emperor  Justinian  calls  the  Bishops  of  Rome  caput  om- 
nium Dei  sacerdotum,  omnium  ecclesidrum ;  and  the  Church  of 
Rome  Apex  Pontificatns,  by  whose  judgment  heretics  were  at  all 
times  overthrown  (Cod.  Justin,  de  summa  Trinib.,  T.  i.,  Ex.  7  and 
8,  novel  9,  at  the  beginning).  When  King  Theodoric  summoned 
a  Synod  "  to  meet  at  Rome,  a.  d.  503,  for  the  purpose  of  passing 
judgment  upon  Pope  Symmachus,  who  had  been  accused  of 
various  misdemeanors,  the  assembled  Bishops  cried  out  that  the 
i^m  oi '  subjecting  the  Head  of  the  C%nrch  to  the  judgment  of 
his  inferiors  was  entirely  unheard  of  The  reply  of  the  Eastern 
Bishops  was  of  a  similar  character."  (Cf  Socrat  h.  e.  ii.  8,  cited 
hj  Alaog,  p.  673.) 

"Peter  has  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Leo,"  said  the -Fathers  at 
Chalcedon  in  451,  when  the  letter  of  S.  Leo  was  read  to  them. 
Fourteen  centuries  later  the  assembled  Bishops  at  Rome  on  S. 
Peter's  Day  cried,  "Peter  has  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Pius." 

In  the  Council  assembled  at  Florence  m  1439,  a  decree  condemn- 
ing the  opinions  professed  at  Constance  to  the  detriment  of  the 
Papal  supremacy  ran  thus :  "  Moreover,  we  find  that  the  Holy 
Apostolic  See  and  the  Roman  Pontiff  possess  the  primacy  over 
the  whole  world,  and  the  Roman  Pontiff  himself  is  the  successor 
of  S.  Peter,  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  and  that  he  is  the  true  Vicar 
of  Christ,  and  Head  of  the  whole  Church,  and  the  Father  and 


'SS4 


IHFALLIBILITT  OF  THE  POP!. 


11 


11 


I 


I* 

ill 


Teacher  of  all  Christians;  and  that  to  him;  S.  Peter,  was  deliirered 
bj  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  the  full  power  of  feedinjr,  rulinj!;,  and 
governing  the  Universal  Cliurch :  as  also  is  contained  in  the  acta 
of  (Ecumenical  Councils  and  in  the  Saned  Canons."  Need  Mr. 
Gladstone  he  reminded  that  it  maa  Innocent  the  Tenth,  in  1653, 
that  condemned  the  propositions  of  .lansenins;  that  it  was  Innocent 
the  Eleventh  who,  in  1682,  raised  his  voice  in  condemnation  of 
the  Gallican  opinions,  which  were  published  for  the  first  time 
■ince  the  Councils  of  Constance  and  i^asle.  Hpace  would  fail  us 
to  note  the  unceasing;  exercise  of  supremacy  by  the  Apostolic  ISee 
in  matters  of  doctrine,  of  morals,  and  of  discipline.  The  previous 
oases  are  sufficient  for  our  purpose,  and  we  would  refer  our 
toadofs  for  further  instances  to  "  Kenrick  on  the  Primacy  of  tho 
BeO  of  8.  Peter,"  or  to  the  invaluable  little  work  of  Father  Knox, 
of  the  Oratory,  entitled  "  When  does  the  Church  speak  Infalli- 
bly T  from  whose  pages  we  have  freely  cited.  We  think  that 
our  readers  will  candidly  avow  that,  notwithstanding  the  assertions 
of  Mr.  Gladstone,  the  power  and  pretentions  of  the  Papacy  have 
lieea  always  the  same. 

But  the  right  honorable  gentleman  feels  much  concern  lest 
this  power  of  the  Pope  should  trespass  on  the  civil  domain. 
We  need  only  remind  him  that  ai^er  the  deeision  of  1870,  the 


ethical  character  present  many  points  of  contact  with  revealed 
truth.  The  principles  on  which  it  is  based  flow  from  the  natural 
law.  They  can  never,  therefore,  be  in  real  contradiction  with 
the  precepts  of  the  Divine  and  positive  law.  Hence  the  State,  if 
it  only  remain  true  to  its  fundamental  principles,  must  ever  be  in 
the  completest  harmony  with  the  Church  and  Revelation. 

Now,  so  long  as  this  harmony  continues,  the  Church  has  neither 
©all  nor  right  to  interfere  with'  the  i^tate,  for  earthly  politics  do 
not  fidl  within  her  direct  jurisdiction.  The  moment,  however, 
the  State  becomes  unfaithful  to  its  principles,  and  contravenes 
the  Divine  and  positive  law,  that  moment  it  is  the  Church's  right 
and  duty,  as  guardian  of  revealed  truth,  to  interfere,  and  pro- 
claim to  the  State  the  truths  which  it  has  ignored,  and  to  con- 
demn tlie  erroneous  maxims  which  it  has  adopted.  Unhappily 
the  State  has  too  often  given  the  Church  occasion  for  interference, 
and  false  doctrines  in  politics  have  always  found  adherents,  be- 
cause they  pandered  to  the  greed  of  power  and  money,  as  well  aa 
to  the  abhorrence  of  control,  which  are  so  deeply  rooted  in  our 
fallen  nature.  In  former  days,  when  civil  society  was  leavened 
with  the  principles  of  the  f*aith,  the  Church,  by  entering  into 
direct  communication  with  the  rulers  of  different  States,  could  often 
auietly  impede  the  spread  of  error,  and  allay,  by  personal  in- 
fluence, the  evil  consequences  arising  from  false  principles  of 
government.  But  what  was  possible  then  is  not  possible  now, 
when  iociety  is  unchristianising  itself  more  and  more  every  day, 
and  kings  and  statesmen  habitually  assume  a  position  of  open  hos- 
tility or  haughty  distrust  toward  the  Church.    Therefore  of  lat« 


ill 


lit 


IKFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  POPE. 


'^Sbd 


years  she  has  been  forced  to  lift  up  her  voice,  and  from  the  Chair 
of  Peter  to  cry  aloud  to  the  faithful  throughout  the  world,  in  ac- 
cents of  solemn  warning,  against  the  pernicious  errors  with  which 
the  political  atmosphere  is  everv-where  loaded." — Knox  on  "The 
Infallibility,"  p.  70.  His  mind  may  be  quieted  by  reading  the 
following  letter,  addressed  l)y  Pope  Gelasius,  at  the  close  of  tho 
fifth  century,  to  the  Emperor  Anastasius : — 

"  God  forbid  that  a  Roman  Prihce  should  feel  offended  at  the 
declaration  of  the  truth !  There  are  two  things,  august  emperor,  ^ 
whereby  this  world  is  governed,  namely,  the  sacred  authority  of 
Pontiffs  and  the  royal  power,  wherein  the  weight  of  priestly 
authority  is  so  much  the  greater,  as  in  the  Divine  judgment 
Priests  must  render  to  the  Lord  an  account  of  themselves.  For 
you  know,  most  clement  son,  that  although  you  preside  over  men, 
you  devoutly  bend  the  neck  to  the  dispensers  of  the  Divine  Mys- 
teries, and  ask  from  them  the  means  of  salvation :  and  in  the  re- 
ception and  proper  administration  of  the  heavenly  Sacraments, 
you  know  that  you  should  be  subject  to  them  according  to  the 
religious  rule,  rather  than  preside  over  them.  You  are  aware, 
then,  that  as  to  these  things  you  depend  on  their  judgment,  and 
that  they  are  not  to  be  forced  to  compliance  with  your  will.  For 
if,  as  regards  public  order,  the  prelates  of  the  Church,  knowing 
that  the  empire  has  been  confided  to  you  by  Divine  Providence, 
obey  our  laws,  lest  they  should  appear  to  oppose  your  will  in 
things  of  this^  world,  with  what  affection  should  you  obey  them 
who  are  appointed  to  dispense  the  awful  mysteries !  Wherefore, 
as  the  Pontiffs  incur  a  serious  responsibility  if  they  suppress 
what  they  should  declare  for  the  honor  of  the  Deity,  so  the  dan- 
ger is  great  of  others  who  insolently  refuse  obedience.  And  if 
the  hearts  of  the  faithful  should  be  submissive  to  all  priests  in 
general  who  treat  Divine  things  properly,  how  much  more  should 
assent  be  yielded  to  the  Prelate  of  this  See,  whom  the  Supreme 
Lord  ordained  to  preside  over  all  priests,  and  whom  the  piety  of 
the  universal  Church  has  always  honored !  You  clearly  under- 
stand that  no  one  can,  by  any  human  device,  oppose  the  prerog- 
ative of  confession  of  him  whom  the  voice  of  Christ  preferred  to 
all  others,  whom  the  Holy  Church  has  always  acknowledged, 
and  whom  she  now  devoutly  regards  as  her  Primate." 

"  This,"  says  Dr.  Kenrick,  from  whom  we  cite,  "  has  been  de. 
servedly  regarded  as  an  admirable  exposition  of  the  relation  of 
Catholic  princes  to  the  prelacy.  The  power  of  the  prince  is  su- 
preme in  the  civil  order;  the  power  of  the  Pontiff  is  supreme  in 
things  spiritual.  The  civil  and  the  ecclesiastical  powers  are  from 
God :  the  former  by  his  implied  sanction  of  the  means  of  main- 
taining social  order;  the  latter  by  the  direct  institution  of  Christ. 
In  both  the  sovereignty  of  Goii  must  be  honored.  The  civil 
power  extends  to  all  things  necessary  for  the  maintenance  and 
welfare  of  society  but  it  can  not  command  any  thing  opposed  to 
the  Divine  law.     The  ecclesiastical  authority  is  eng:i^ed   in  tho 

Sroraulgation  of  truth  and  the  maintenance  of  discipline,  with  a 
m  respect  for  public  order  as  regulated  by  the  civil  power. 


I 


i 'tj 


-2G 


INFALLIBILITT  OF  TUB  FOPB. 


'•Tlie  Pope,  2m  head  on  earth  of  the  Church,  exercises,  by  Di- 
vme  right,  authority  over  Catholic  princes  in  the  things  that  are 
of  salvation.  When  by  flagrant  crimes  they  cause  the  name  of 
God  to  be  blasphemed,  he  may  admonish  and  reprove  them,  m 
Nathan  reproved  David  by  the  Divine  command ;  and,  in  case  of 
contumacy,  he  may  inflict  on  them  ecclesiastical  censures.  The 
exercise  of  this  power  peculiarly  suits  the  Chief  Bishop,  since 
local  prelates  could  scarcely  venture  to  say  to  their  prince — 
'  Thou  art  the  man.*  The  majesty  of  the  Sovereign  is  guarded 
by  reserving  cases  in  which  he  is  concerned  to  the  mature  and 
unbiased  judgment  of  the  Pontiff." — (Primacy  of  the  Apostolic 
See,  p.  326.) 

These  extracts,  bo  clearly  stating  the  relations  of  the  primacy 
to  the  civil  power,  wiU  doubtless  establish,  to  the  satisfaction  of 
many,  that,  instead  of  seeking  the  destruction  of  the  State,  the 
Church  has  always  been  her  co-operator,  and  that  in  condemning, 
aa  «he  has  in  her  Syllabus,  a  iiberias  which  is  synonymous  witn 
license,  and  in  maintaining  the  supremacy  of  Divine  authority 
in  declaring  the  sacr^dness  of  marriage,  and  asserting  the  neces- 
sity of  religion  in  the  instruction  of  vouth  (see  the  18th  propo- 
sition, cited  on  page  16  of  the  pamphlet),  she  is  but  throwing  a 
safeguard  arouna  society,  and  upholding  the  absolute  sovereignty 
of  God  over  man. 

We  should  have  expected  that  a  High  Churchman  like  Mr. 
Gladstone,  and  a  statesman  of  such  great  experience,  who,  doubt- 
less, recognizes  the  necessity  for  enactments  such  as  Lord  Camp- 
bell 8  Act,  would,  instead  of  questioning  these  truths,  be  the  first 
to  give  them  his  cordial  assent.  He  must  not  blame  us  if,  in- 
itoail  of  accepting  his  views  on  these  points,  we  prefer  to  be 
guided  by  the  unerring  instinct  of  the  Cnurch  of  God. 


REPLY  OF  LORD  ACTON. 


Hh  the  Editor  of  ike  Times  : 

giR^_Mav  I  ask  you  to  publish  the  inclosed  preliminary  reply 
to  Mr.  Glaastone's  public  Expostulation? 

Your  obedient  servant, 

ACTON. 

AthbnjEUM,  November  8. 

Dear  Mr.  Gladstone, — ^I  will  not  anticipate  by  a  single  word 
the  course  which  those  who  are  immediately  concerned  may 
adopt  in  answer  to  your  challenge.  But  there  are  points  which 
I  think  you  have  overlooked,  and  which  may  be  raised  most  fitly 
by  those  who  are  least  responsible.  The  question  of  policy  and 
opportuneness  I  leave  for  others  to  discuss  with  you.  Speaking 
in  the  open  daylight,  from  my  own  point  of  view,  as  a  Roman 
Catholic  born  in  the  nineteenth  century,  I  can  not  object  that 
facts  which  are  of  a  nature  to  influence  the  belief  of  men  should 
be  brought  completely  to  their  knowledge.  Concealment  is  un- 
worthy of  those  things  which  are  Divine  and  holy  in  religion,  and 
in  those  things  which  are  human  and  profane  publicity  has  value 

as  a  check. 

I  understand  your  argument  to  be  substantially  as  follows: 
The  Catholics  obtained  Emancipation  by  declaring  that  they 
were  in  every  sense  of  the  term  loyal  and  faithful  subjects  of 
the  realm,  and  that  Papal  Infiillibility  was  not  a  dogma  of  their 
Church.  Later  events  have  ftilsified  one  declaration,  have  dis- 
turbed the  stability  of  the  other;  and  the  problem,  .therefore, 
arises,  whether  the  authority  which  has  annulled  the  profession 
of  faith  made  by  the  Catholics  would  not  be  competent  to  change 
their  conceptions  of  political  duty. 

This  is  a  question  that  may  be  fairly  asked,  and  it  was  long 
since  made  familiar  to  the  Catholics  by  the  language  of  their  own 
Bishops.  One  of  them  has  put  it  in  the  following  terms:  "  How 
shall  we  persuade  the  Protestants  that  we  are  not  acting  in  defi- 
ance of  honor  and  good  faith,  if,  having  declared  that  Infalli- 
bility was  not  an  article  of  our  faith  while  we  were  contending 
for  our  rights,  we  should,  now  that  we  have  got  what  we  wanted, 
withdraw  from  our  public  declaration  and  aflirm  the  contrary  ? 
The  case  is,  primA  facie,  a  strong  one,  and  it  would  be  still  more 
serious  if  the  whole  structure  of  our  liberties  and  our  toleration 

(227) 


P 


BirLT  or  LORD  AOTON. 

WIS  foiinded  on  the  declarations  given  by  the  English  and  Irish 
Bishops  some  years  before  the  Belief  Act.  Those  documents,  in- 
teresting and  significant  as  they  are,  are  unknown  to  the  Consti- 
Imtion.  What  is  known,  and  what  was  for  a  generation  part  of 
the  law  of  the  country,  is  something  more  solemn  and  substantial 
thsn  a  series  of  unproved  assertions — namely,  the  oath  in  which 
the  political  essence  of  those  declarations  was  concentrated. 
That  was  the  security  which  Parliament  reouired ;  that  was  the 
pledge  by  which  we  were  bound ;  and  it  binds  us  no  more.  The 
Lepilffltiire,  judging  that  what  was  sufficient  for  Republicans, 
WIS  sufficient  for  Catholics,  abolished  the  oath,  for  the  best 
roasons,  some  time  before  the  disestablishment  of  the  Irish 
Church.  If  there  is  no  longer  a  special  bond  for  the  loyalty  of 
Ckiholics,  the  fact  is  due  to  the  delioerate  judgment  of  the  House 
of  Commons.  After  having  surrendered  the  only  real  constitu- 
tional security,  there  seems  scarcely  reason  to  lament  the  depre- 
ciation of  a  less  substantial  guarantee,  which  was  very  indirectly 
eonneeted  with  the  action  of  Parliament,  and  was  virtually  supers 
seded  bv  the  oath. 

The  doctrines  against  which  you  are  contending  did  not  begin 
with  the  Vatican  Council.  At  the  time  when  the  Catholic  oath 
wan  repealed  the  Pope  had  the  same  right  and  power  to  excom- 
municate those  who  denied  his  authority  to  depose  princes  that 
he  possesses  now.  The  writers  most  esteemed  at  Kome  held  that 
doctrine  as  an  article  of  faith;  a  modern  Pontiff  had  affirmed 
IllSt  it  can  not  be  abandoned  without  taint  of  heresy,  and  that 
Hume  who  questioned  and  restricted  his  authority  in  temporal 
matters  were  worse  than  those  who  rejected  it  in  spirituals ;  and 
accordingly  men  suffered  death  for  this  cause  as  others  did  for 
lilasphemy  and  Atheism.  The  recent  decrees  have  neither  in- 
creased the  penalty  nor  made  it  more  easy  to  inflict. 

That  is  the  true  answer  to  your  appeal.  Your  indictment 
would  be  more  just  if  it  was  more  complete.  If  you  pursue  the 
inquiry  further,  vou  will  find  graver  matter  than  all  you  have 
enumerated,  established  by  higher  and  more  ancient  authority 
than  a  meeting  of  Bishops  half-a-century  ago.  And  then  I  think 
ymt  will  admit  that  your  Catholic  countrymen  can  not  fairly  be 
ealled  on  to  account  for  every  narticle  of  a  system  which  has 
Bfiver  come  before  them  in  its  integrity,  or  for  opinions  whose 
existence  among  divines  they  would  be  exceedingly  reluctant  to 
neiievoB 

1  will  explain  my  meaning  by  an  example:  A  Pop  who  lived 
in  Catholic  times,  and  who  is  famous  in  history  as  the  author  of 
the  int  Crusade,  decided  that  it  is  no  murder  to  kill  excommu- 
iiieated  persons.  This  rule  was  incorporated  in  the  Canon  Law. 
In  the  revision  of  the  Code,  which  took  place  in  the  16th  cen- 
iniy,  and  produced  a  whole  volume  of  corrections,  the  passage 
was  allowed  to  stand.  It  appears  in  every  reprint  of  the  "  Cor- 
pus Juris."  It  has  been  for  700  years,  and  continues  to  be,  part 
(»f  the  ecclesiastical  law.  Far  from  having  been  a  dead  letter,  it 
eiblained  new  application  in  the  days  of  the  Inquisition ;  and  one 
of  the  later  Popes  has  declared  that  the  murder  of  a  Protestant 


RKPLY  OP  LOKD  ACTON. 


229 


is  so  good  a  deed  that  it  atones,  and  more  than  atones,  for  the 
murder  of  a  Catholic.  Again,  the  ^eatest  legislator  of  the  Med- 
iaeval Church  laid  down  this  proposition,  that  allegiance  must  not 
be  kept  with  heretical  Princes — cum  ei  qui  Deo  Jidem  non  servat 
Jides  servanda  non  sit  This  principle  was  adopted  by  a  celebrated 
Council,  and  is  confirmed  by  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  oracle  of 
the  schools.  The  Syllabus  which  you  cite  has  assuredly  not  ac- 
quired greater  authority  in  the  Church  than  the  Canon  Law  and 
the  Lateran  Decrees,  than  Innocent  the  Third  and  St.  Thomas. 
Yet  these  things  were  as  well  known  when  the  oath  was  repealed 
as  they  are  now.  But  it  was  felt  that,  whatever  might  be  the  let- 
ter of  Canons  and  the  spirit  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Laws,  the  Cath-  . 
olic  people  of  this  country  might  be  honorably  trusted. 

But  I  will  pass  from  the  letter  to  the  spirit  which  is  moving 
men  at  the  present  day.  It  belongs  peculiarly  to  the  character  of 
ft  genuine  Ultramontane  not  only  to  guide  his  life  by  the  example 
of  canonized  Saints,  but  to  receive  with  reverence  and  submission  . 
the  words  of  Popes.  Now,  Pius  V.,  the  only  Pope  who  has  been  I 
proclaimed  a  Saint  for  many  centuries,  having  deprived  Elizabeth, 
commissioned  an  assassin  to  take  her  life;  and  his  next  successor, 
on  learning  that  the  Protestants  were  being  massacred  in  France, 
pronounced  the  action  glorious  and  holy,  but  comparatively  bar- 
ren of  results ;  and  implored  the  King  during  two  months,  by  his 
Nuncio  and  his  Legate,  to  carry  the  work  on  to  the  bitter  end  un- 
til every  Huguenot  had  recanted  or  perished.  It  is  hard  to  believe 
that  these  things  can  excite  in  the  bosom  of  the  most  fervent  Ul- 
tramontane that  sort  of  admiration  or  assent  that  displays  itself 
in  action.  If  they  do  not,  then  it  can  not  be  truly  said  that  Cath- 
olics forfeit  their  moral  freedom,  or  place  their  duty  at  the  mercy 
of  another.  ,  * 

There  is  waste  of  power  by  friction  even  in  well-constructed 
machines,  and  no  machinery  can  enforce  that  degree  of  uni^ 
and  harmony  which  you  apprehend.  Little  fellowship  or  confi- 
dence  is  possible  between  a  man  who  recognizes  the  common 
principles  of  morality  as  we  find  them  in  the  overwhelming  mass 
of  the  writers  of  our  Church  and  one  who,  on  learning  that  the 
murder  of  a  Protestant  Sovereign  has  been  inculcated  by  a  samt, 
or  the  slaughter  of  Protestant  subjects  approved  by  a  Pope,  sets 
himself  to  find  a  new  interpretation  for  the  Decalogue.  There  is 
little  to  apprehend  from  combinations  between  men  divided  bv 
such  a  gulf  as  this,  or  from  the  unity  of  a  body  composed  of  such 
antagonistic  materials.  But  where  there  is  not  union  of  an  active 
or  aj^ressive  kind,  there  may  be  unity  in  defense ;  and  it  is  pos- 
sible, in  making  provision  against  the  one,  to  promote  and  to 
conform  the  other. 

There  has  been,  and  I  believe  there  is  still,  some  exaggeration 
in  the  idea  men  form  of  the  agreement  in  thought  and  deed  which 
authority  can  accomplish.  As  far  as  decrees,  censures,  and  per- 
secution could  commit  the  Court  of  Rome,  it  was  committed  to 
the  denial  of  the  Copernican  system.  Nevertheless,  the  history 
of  astronomy  shows  a  whole  catena  of  distin§;uished  Jesuits ; 
and,  a  century  ago,  a  Spaniard,  who  thought  himself  bound  to 


rM 


M 

(tar 


230 


BBFLY   OF  LORI^  ACTON. 


!||u 


adopfc  the  Ptolemaic  iheorj,  was  laughed  at  by  the  Roman  diTines. 
The  submission  of  Fenelon,  which  ProteBtanta  and  Catholics  have 
■0  often  celebrated,  is  another  instance  to  my  point. ^  When  his 
hmk  waa  condemned,  F^nelon  publicly  acceptea  the  judgment  as 
lb«  voice  of  God.  He  declarea  that  he  adnered  to  the  decree 
•hiolutely  and  without  &  shadow  of  reserve,  and  there  were  no 
bounds  to  hia  submission.  In  private  he  wrote  that  his  opinions 
were  perfectly  orthodox  and  remained  unchanged,  that  his  opj:ro- 
mmkiB  were  in  the  wrong,  and  thai  Rome  waa  getting  religion 
into  peari 

It  IS  not  the  unpropitious  timea  only,  but  the  very  nature  of 
things,  that  protect  Catholicism  from  the  consequences  of  some 
theories  that  have  grown  up  within  it.  The  Irish  did  not  shrink 
from  resisting  the  arms  of  Henry  II.,  though  two  Popes  had  eiven 
him  dominion  over  them.  They  fought  against  Wflliam  III.,  al- 
tlwugh  the  Pope  had  given  him  efficient  support  in  his  expedition. 
Even  James  II.,  when  he  could  not  get  a  mitre  for  Petre,  reminded 
Innocent  that  people  could  be  very  good  Catholics  and  yet  do 
without  Rome.  Philip  II.  was  excommunicated  and  deprived, 
but  be  dispatched  his  army  against  Rome  with  the  full  concur- 
rence of  the  Spanish  divines. 

That  opinions  likely  to  injure  our  position  as  loyal  subjects  of 
S  Protestant  sovereign,  as  citizens  of  a  free  State,  as  members  of 
a  community  divided  in  religion,  have  flourished  at  various  times, 
and  in  various  degrees,  that  they  can  claim  high  sanction,  tliat 
they  are  often  uttered  in  the  exasperation  of  controversy,  and  are 
most  Rtron|rIy  urged  at  a  time  when  there  is  no  possibility  of  put- 
ting them  into  practice — this  all  men  must  concede.  But  I  affirm 
that,  in  the  fiercest  conflict  of  the  Reformation,  when  the  rulers 
of  the  Church  had  almost  lost  heart  in  the  struggle  for  existence, 
and  exhausted  every  resource  of  their  authority,  both  political 
and  spiritual,  the  Dulk  of  the  English  Catholics  retained  the 
spirit  of  a  better  time.  You  do  not,  I  am  glad  to  say,  deny  that 
tU  continn™  to  be  true.  But  you  think  that  we  ought  to  be 
compelled  to  demonstrate  one  of  two  things — that  the  Pope  can 
not/bj  virtue  of  powers  »»serted  by  the  late  Council,  nmke  a 
claim  which  he  was  perfectly  able  to  make  by  virtue  of  powers 
asserted  for  him  belbre;  or,  that  he  would  be  resisted  if  he  did. 
The  first  is  superfluous.  The  second  is  not  capable  of  receiving 
a  written  demonstration.  Therefore,  neither  of  the  alternatives 
you  propose  to  the  Catholics  of  this  country  opens  to  us  a  way 
of  escaping  from  the  reproach  we  have  incurred.  Whether  there 
is  more  truth  in  your  misgivings  or  in  my  confidence  the  event 
will  show,  I  hope,  at  not  distant  time. 

I  remain  sincerely  yours, 

ACTON. 


VATICANISM. 


Mr.  Glamtone*s  Reply  to  His  Critics— His  Views  op  the 
Bbarino  of  the  Vatican  Decrees  on  Civil  Allegiance  Re- 
asserted IN  A  Second  Pamphlet — ^The  Objections  op  Dr. 
Newman  and  Archbishop  Manning  Analyzed — ^Papal  Infal- 
libility, Reason  and  Conscience. 


In  his  tract  on  the  Vatican  Decrees,  Mr.  Gladstone  dwelt  prin- 
cipally on  two  main  propositions :  I.  That  Rome  had  reproduced 
for  active  service  those  doctrines  of  former  times  termed  by  him 
"rusty  tools,"  which  she  was  fondly  thought  to  have  disused.  2. 
That  the  Pope  now  claims,  with  plenary  authority,  from  every 
member  of  his  Church,  that  he  shall  place  his  loyalty  and  civil 
duty  at  the  mercy  of  another  j  that  other  being  himself.  The 
truth  of  these  assertions  was  immediately  and  vigorously  denied 
by  some  of  the  ablest  men  of  the  Catholic  Church,  notably  by  Dr. 
Newman  and  Archbishop  Manning ;  and  to  these  able  antagonists 
Mr.  Gladstone's  answer  is  principally  addressed.  His  object  is 
twofold  :  first,  to  state  in  what  degree  he  conceived  the  immediate 
purpose  of  his  Expostulation  to  have  been  served ;  secondly,  to 
examine  whether  the  allegations  of  antagonists  have  dislodged  his 
arguments  from  their  main  positions,  or,  on  the  contrary,  have 
confirmed  them,  and  to  restate  those  positions  accordingly. 

After  a  splendid  outline  of  eulogy  of  the  character  and  ability 
of  his  principal  antagonists.  Dr.  Newman  and  Archbishoj)  Man- 
ning, Mr.  Gladstone  proceeds  to  discuss  the  "  rusty  tools."  He 
has  been  charged  with  misrepresenting  the  language  of  the  Syl- 
labus, and  he  defends,  at  the  outset,  his  good  faitn  and  care  in  his 
Bummaiy  of  that  important  document. —  Cin.  Com'l. 

The  Pamphlet. 

The  first  charge  of  unjust  representation  is  this:  I  have  stated 
that  the  Pope  condemns  liberty  of  the  press  and  liberty  of  speech. 
By  reference  to  the  original,  it  is  shown  that  the  right  of  print 
ing  and  speaking  ia  not  in  terms  condemned  universally ;  but  only 
the  right  of  each  man  to  print  or  speak  all  his  thoughts  {stios 
eonceptus  quoscunque),  whatever  they  may  be.  Hereupon  it  ia 
justly  observed  that  in  all  countries  there  are  laws  against  bias- 

(231) 


jglj^ 


THB  PAMPHLBT 


THE  EiFALLIOILlTY  OF  THE  POPE. 


JiHd 


plieiiiy,  OP  obscenity,  op  Bedition.  op  all  thpeo.  It  is  argued,  then, 
timt  men  are  not  allowed  ilio  right  to  speak  or  print  all  their 
thongbts,  and  that  such  an  extreme  right  only  is  what  the  Pope 
has  condemned. 

It  appears  to  me  that  this  is,  to  use  a  mild  phrase,  mere  trifling 
with  tne  subject  We  are  asked  to  believe  that  what  the  Pope 
intended  to  condemn  waa  a  state  of  things  which  never  has  ex- 
isted in  any  country  of  the  world.  Now  he  says  he  is  condemn- 
ing one  of  the  commonly  prevailing  errors  of  the  time,  familiarly 
known  to  the  Bishops  whom  he  addresses.  What  Bishop  knows 
of  a  State  which  by  law  allows  a  perfectly  free  course  of  blas- 
jAemy,  filthiness  and  sedition  ?  The  world  knows  quite  well  what 
M  mmMt  by  free  speech  and  a  free  press.  It  does  mean,  cenerally, 
iwphaps  it  may  be  said  universally,  the  right  of  declaring  all 
opinions  whatsoever.  The  limit  of  freedom  is  not  the  justness  of 
the  opinion,  but  it  is  this,  that  it  shall  be  opinion  in  good  faith, 
and  not  mere  grossness,  passion,  or  appeal  to  violence.  The  law 
of  England  at  this  moment,  allowing  all  opinions  whatever,  pro- 
¥ided  they  are  treated  by  way  of  rational  discourse,  most  closely 
olipresponds  to  what  the  Pope  has  condemned.  His  condemna- 
tion is  illustrated  bjr  his  own  practice  of  Governor  in  the  Roman 
States,  where  no  opinions  could  be  spoken  or  printed,  bat  such 
as  he  approved.  Once,  indeed,  he  permitted  a  free  discussion  on 
8t  Peter's  presence  and  prelacy  in  the  city;  but  he  repented 
i|iiiokIy,  and  forbade  the  repetition  of  it  ^  We  mi^ht  even  cite  his 
practice  as  Pope  in  1870,  where  every  thing  was  done  to  keep  the 
proceedings  ot  the  Council  secret  from  the  Church  which  it  pro- 
fessed to  represent,  and  even  practically  secret  from  its  members, 
«X4Mpt  those  who  were  of  the  governing  cabal.  But  there  can  be 
no  better  mode  of  exhibiting  his  real  meaning  than  by  referring 
to  Ma  account  of  the  Austrian  law.  Mac  lege  omnis  omnium 
©piiifoiiMiii  et  UbraricB  ariis  Mbertas,  omnis  turn  Mei,  turn  con- 
mieniiw  ate  docirinm,  lihertas  slatuiiur.  [From  the  Pope's  Allo- 
cution of  June  22,  1868:  "By  this  law  is  established  universal 
liberty  of  all  opinions  and  of  the  press,  and,  as  of  belief,  so  of 
©onicience  and  of  teaching."]  To  the  kind  of  condemnation  given 
I  shall  again  refer ;  but  the  matter  of  it  is  nothing  abstract  or 
iiiiglnary — it  is  actual  freedom  of  thinking,  speaking^  and  print- 
ing, as  it  is  practiced  in  a  great  civilized  and  Christian  empire. 
I  repel,  then,  the  charge  against  me  as  no  better  than  a  verbal 
mbterfuge;  and  I  again  affirm  that  in  his  Syllabus,  as  in  his  acts, 
the  Pope  has  condemned  liberty  of  speech  and  liberty  of  the  press. 

Thb  Marriaoe  QuESTioir. 

A  grave  charge  is  made  against  me  respecting  the  matrimonial 
pwpositions,  because  I  have  cited  the  Pope  as  condemning  those 
who  affirm  that  the  matrimonial  contract  is  binding  whether  there 
is  OP  is  not  (according  to  the  Roman  doctrine)  a  sacrament,  and 
liA¥e  not  at  the  same  time  stated  that  English  marriages  are  held 
by  Rome  to  be  sacramental,  and  therefore  valid. 


No  charge,  serious  op  slight,  could  be  more  e;ntirely  futile. 
But  it  is  serious,  and  not  slight,  and  those  who  prompt  the  exam- 
ination must  abide  the  recoil.     I  begin  thus : 

1.  I  am  censured  for  not  having  given  distinctions  between  on© 
country  and  another,  which  the  Pope  himself  has  not  given. 

2.  And  which  are  also  thought  unnecessary  by  authorized  ex- 
pounders of  the  Syllabus  for  the  faithful.  1  have  before  me  the 
Exposition,  with  the  text  of  the  Encyclica  and  Syllabus,  published 
at  Cologne  in  1874,  with  the  approval  of  authority  (mit  ober- 
kirchlicher  Approbation).  In  page  45  it  is  distinctly  taun;ht  that 
with  marriage  the  State  has  nothing  to  do;  that  it  may  safely  rely 
upon  the  Church ;  that  civil  marriage,  in  the  eyes  of  the  Church, 
is  only  concubinage;  and  that  the  State,  by  the  use  of  worldly 
compulsion,  prevent  the  two  concubinary  parties  from  repenting 
and  abandoning  their  guilty  relation  to  one  another.  Exactly  the 
same  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Pope  himself,  in  his  speeches  pub- 
lished at  Rome,  where  civil  marriage  is  declared  to  be,  for  Chris- 
tians, nothing  more  than  a  mere  concubinage,  and  a  filthv  concu- 
binage {sozzo  conmbinato).  These  extraordinary  declarations 
are  not  due  to  the  fondness  of  the  Pontiflf  for  speaking  intr 
promjitu.  In  his  letter  of  September  18,  1852,  to  King  Victor 
Emmanuel,  he  declares  that  matrimony  carrying  the  Sacrament 
is  alone  lawful  for  Christians,  and  that  a  law  of  civil  marriage, 
which  goes  to  divide  them,  for  practical  purposes,  constitutes  a 
concubinage  in  the  guise  of  legitimate  marriage.  So  that,  in 
truth,  in  all  countries  within  the  scope  of  tliese  denunciations, 
the  parties  to  a  civil  marriage  are  declared  to  be  living  in  an  il- 
licit connection,  which  they  are  called  upon  to  renounce.  This 
call  is  addressed  to  them  separately,  as  well  as  jointly,  the  wife 
being  summoned  to  leave  her  husband,  and  the  husband  to  aban- 
don his  wife ;  and  after  this  pretended  repentance  from  a  state 
of  sin,  unless  the  law  of  the  land  and  fear  of  consequences  pre- 
vail, a  new  connection,  under  the  name  of  a  marriage,  may  be 
formed  with  the  sanction  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  I  know  not  by 
what  infatuation  it  is  that  adversaries  have  compelled  me  thus  to 
develop  a  stjite  of  facts  created  by  the  highest  authorities  of  the 
Roman  Church,  which  I  shall  now  not  shrink  from  calling  hop- 
pible  and  revolting  in  itself,  dangerous  to  the  morals  of  society, 
the  structure  of  the  family  and  the  peace  of  life 

The  Infallibility  op  the  Pope. 

After  citing  various  authorities  to  sustain  his  views  of  the  dog- 
matic force  of  the  Syllabus,  denied  by  Dr.  Newman,  Mr.  Glad- 
stone proceeds  to  consider  the  "  Vatican  Council  and  the  Infalli- 
bility of  the  Pope." 

Like  the  chieftains  of  the  heroic  time,  Archbishop  Manning 
takes  his  place  with  promptitude,  and  operates  in  front  of  the 

force  he  leads.  , 

Upon  the  first  appearance  of  my  tract  he  instantly  gave  utter- 
ance to  the  following  propositions;  nor  has  he  since  receded  from 
them. 


•'I 


<   f 


234' 


THE  INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  roPK. 


THE  INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  POPE. 


235 


fiii 


First— That  th©  Infallibility  of  the  Pope  was  a  doctrine  of 
Bivinc  Faith  before  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  was  held. 

Hecond — ^That  the  Yatiain  Decrees  have  in  no  jot  or  tittle 
eliitiiged  either  the  obligations  or  the  conditions  of  civil  allegi- 
imee^ 

Tltird— That  the  ciril  allegiance  of  Eomftn  Catholics  is  as  un- 
divided as  thai  of  other  Christians,  and  neither  more  nor  less 
lunited. 

Fourth — That  the  claim  of  the  Roman  Church  against  obedi- 
wm^  to  the  civil  power  in  certain  cases  is  the  same  as  that  mado 
bj  other  religious  communions  in  England. 

These  four  propositions  may  be  treated  as  two.  The  first  is  so 
alied  with  the  second,  and  the  third  with  the  fourth,  that  the  two 
members  of  each  pair  respectively  must  stand  or  fall  together. 
I  ean  make  no  objection  to  the  manner  in  which  they  raise  the 
fiiestion.  I  shall  leave  it  to  others,  whom  it  may  more  concern, 
to  treat  that  portion  of  his  work  in  which  passing  by  matters 
that  more  nearly  touch  his  argument,  he  has  entered  at  large  on 
the  controversj  between  Rome  and  the  German  Empire;  nor 
shall  I  now  discuss  his  compendium  of  Italian  history,  which  in 
no  manner  touches  the  question  whether  the  dominion  of  the 
Pope  ought  again  to  be  imposed  by  foreign  arms  upon  a  portion 
of  the  Italian  people.  But  of  the  four  propositions  I  will  say 
that  1  accept  tliem  all,  subject  to  the  very  simple  condition  that 
the  word  "not"  be  inserted  in  the  three  whicn  arc  affirmative, 
and  its  equivalent  struck  out  from  the  one  which  is  negative. 

Oft  to  state  the  case  in  my  own  words : 

My  task  will  be  to  make  ^ood  the  two  following  assertions, 
which  were  the  principal  subjects  of  my  former  argument : 

1.  That  upon  the  authority,  for  many  jgeuerations,  of  those 
who  preceded  Archbishop  Manning  and  his  coadjutors  in  their 

f  resent  official  position,  as  well  as  upon  other  authority,  Papal 
nliillibility  was  not  "a  doctrine   of  Divine  Faith    before  the 
Council  of  the  Vatican  was  held." 

And  that,  therefore,  the  Vatican  Decrees  have  changed  the  ob- 
ligations and  condition  of  civil  allegiance. 

2.  That  the  claim  of  the  Papal  Church  against  obedience  to 
the  civil  power  in  certain  eases  not  only  goes  beyond,  but  is  es- 
sentially difierent  from  that  made  by  other  religious  communions 
or  by  their  members  in  England. 

And  that,  therefore,  the  civil  allegiance  of  those  who  admit  the 
claim,  and  carry  it  to  its  logical  consequences,  is  not  for  the  pup 
pwes  of  the  State  the  same  with  that  of  other  Christians,  but  is 
iiffsrently  limited. 

In  his  able  and  lengthened  work,  Archbishop  Manning  has 
found  s|>ace  for  a  dissertation  on  the  great  German  quarrel,  but 
has  not  included,  in  his  proof  of  the  belief  in  Papal  infallibility 
before  1870,  any  reference  to  the  history  of  the  Church  over 
whicli  he  presides,  or  the  sister  Church  in  Ireland.  This  very 
grave  deficiency  1  shall  endeavor  to  make  good,  by  enlarging  and 
completing  the  statement  briefiy  given  in  my  tract.  That  state- 
menl  was  that  the  English  and  Irish  penal  laws  against  Roman 


Catholics  were  repealed  on  the  faith  of  assurances  which  have 
not  been  fulfilled. 

Had  all  antagonists  been  content  to  reply  with  the  simple  in- 
genuousness of  Dr.  Newman,  it  might  have  been  unnecessary  to 
resume  this  portion  of  the  subject.  I  make  no  complaint  of  the 
Archbishop,  for  such  a  reply  would  have  destroyed  hi^case.  Dr. 
Newman,  struggling  hard  with  the  difficulties  of  the  task,  finds 
that  the  statement  of  Dr.  Doyle  requires  "some  pious  interpreta- 
tion;" that  in  1826  the  clergy  both  of  England  and  Ireland  were 
trained  in  Gallican  opinions,  and  had  modes  of  thinking  "  foreign 
altogether  to  the  minds  of  the  entourage  of  the  Holy  See ; " 
that  the  British  Ministers  ought  to  have  applied  to  Rome  to  learn 
the  civil  duties  of  British  subjects,  and  that  "no  pledge  from 
Catholics  was  of  any  value  to  which  Rome  was  not  a  party." 

This  declaration  involves  all,  and  more  than  all,  that  I  had  ven- 
tured reluctantly  to  impute.  Statesmen  of  the  future,  recollect 
the  words,  and  recollect  from  whom  they  came — from  the  man 
who,  by  his  genius,  piety,  and  learning,  towers  above  all  the  em- 
inences of  the  Anglo-Fapal  communion;  who,  so  declares  a 
Romish  organ,  "has  been  the  mind  and  tongue  to  shape  and 
express  the  English  Catholic  position  in  the  many  controversies 
which  have  aijsen"  since  1845,  and  who  has  been  roused  from 
his  repose  on  this  occasion  only  by  the  most  fervid  appeals  to 
him  as  the  man  that  could  best  teach  his  co-religionists  how  and 
what  to  think.  The  lesson  received  is  this:  Although  pledgee 
were  given,  although  their  validity  was  firmly  and  even  passion- 
ately asserted,  although  the  subject-matter  was  one  of  civil  alle- 
giance, "  no  pledge  from  Catholics  was  of  any  value  to  which 
Rome  was  not  a  party." 

In  all  seriousness  I  ask  whether  there  is  not  involved  in  these 
words  of  Dr.  Newman  an  ominous  approximation  to  my  allegation 
that  the  seceder  to  the  Roman  Church  "  places  his  loyalty  and 
civil  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another  ?  " 

But  as  Archbishop  Manning  has  asserted  that  the  decrees  of 
the  Vatican  have  "  in  no  jot  or  tittle  "  altered  civil  allegiance,  and 
that  "  before  the  Council  was  held  the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope 
was  a  doctrine  of  Divine  Faith,  and  as  he  is  the  official  head  of 
the  Anglo-Roman  body,  I  must  test  his  assertions  by  one  of  those 
appeals  to  history  which  he  has  sometimes  said  are  treason  to 
the  Church,  as  indeed  thev  are  in  his  sense  of  the  Church,  and 
in  his  sense  of  treason.  It  is  only  justice  to  the  Archbishop  to 
add  that  he  does  not  stand  alone.  Bishop  UUathorne  says  "  the 
Pope  always  wielded  this  infallibility,  and  all  men  knew  this  to 
be  the  fact."  We  shall  presently  find  some  men,  whose  history 
the  Bishop  should  have  been  familiar  with,  who  did  not  know 
this  to  be  the  fact,  but  very  solemnly  assured  us  they  knew  the 
exact  contrary. 

This  is  not  an  affair,  as  Dr.  Newman  seems  to  think,  of  a  par- 
ticular generation  of  clergy  who  had  been  educated  in  Gallican 
opinions.  In  all  times,  from  the  reign  of  Elizabeth  to  that  of 
Victoria,  the  lay  Roman  Catholics  of  England,  as  a  body,  have 
been  eminently  and  unreservedly  loyal.     But  they  have  been  as 


236 


TBI  OfrALLIBIIiFTY  OF  Ml  fOFl. 


f  HB  INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  POPS. 


237 


I 


I 


wniiiently  noted  for  their  thorough  estrangement  from  UltMmon- 
tttoc  opinions;  and  their  clergy,  down  to  the  period  of  the  Eman- 
©ipfttion  act,  felfc  with  them;  though  a  school  addicted  to  cunal- 
isii  and  Jesuitism,  thrust  among  them  hy  the  Popes  at  the 
uoaimencemcnt  of  the  period,  first  brought  upon  them  grievous 
BiiftringH,  then  succeeded  in  attaching  a  stigma  to  their  name, 
and  now  threatens  gradually  to  accomplish  a  transformation  of 
their  opinions,  with  an  eventual  chance  in  their  spirit,  of  which 
it  is  difficult  to  foresee  the  bounds,  ^ot  that  the  men  who  hold 
the  ancestral  view  will,  as  a  rule,  exchange  it  for  the  view  of  the 
Vatican;  but  that,  as  in  the  course  of  nature  they  depart,  Vati- 
omisls  will  grow  up  and  take  their  places.  ,  ,.  .  _,  ,  . 
The  first  official  head  of  the  Anglo-Koman  body  m  England 
was  the  wise  and  loyal  Archpriest  Blackwell  He  was  deposed 
by  the  Pope  in  1608,  "chiefly,  it  is  supposed,  for  his  advocacy  of 
the  Oath  of  Allegiance,"  which  had  been  devised  by  King  James, 
in  order  that  he  mijgihfc  confer  peace  and  security  upon  loyal  Ro- 
man Catholics.  Belarmine  denounced  as  heretical  its  denial  of 
the  power  of  the  Pope  to  depose  the  King  and  release  his  subjects 
from  their  allegiance.  Pope  Paul  V.  condemned  the  brief  in 
October,  1606.  The  unfortunate  members  of  his  communion 
could  not  believe  this  brief  to  be  authentic.  .  So  a  second  brief 
was  sent  in  September,  1607,  to  confirm  and  enforce  the  first. 
Blmekwell  gallantly  advised  his  flock  to  take  the  oath  in  defiance 
of  the  brief.  Priests  confined  in  Newgate  petitioned  the  Pope  to 
have  compassion  on  them.  Forty-eight  doctors  of  the  Sorbonne 
lliaynst  six  declared  that  it  might  be  taken  with  good  conscience. 
And  taken  it  was  by  many,  but  taken  in  spite  of  the  tyrannical 
injunctions  of  Paul  V.,  unhappily  confirmed  by  Urban  Vlll.  and 

toy  Innocent  X.  .  ,    „  ri    i.  i- 

When  it  was  proposed  in  1648  to  banish  Roman  Catholics  on 
•©count  of  the  deposing  power,  their  divines  met  and  renounced 
the  doctrine.  This  renunciation  was  condemned  at  Rome  as  heret- 
i<ml;  but  the  attitude  of  France  on  these  questions  at  the  time 
Bfevented  the  publication  of  the  decree. 

When  the  loyal  remonstrance  of  1661  had  been  signed  by 
certain  Bishops  and  others  of  Ireland,  it  was  condemned  at  Rome 
in  July.  1662,  by  the  Congregation  de  Propaganda,  and  in  the 
same  month  tlie  Papal  Nuncio  at  Brussels,  who  superintended 
the  concerns  of  Irish  Roman  Catholics  at  the  time,  denounced 
it  as  already  condemned  by  the  constitutions  of  Paul  V.  and  I|i- 
nocent  X.,  and  specially  censured  the  ecclesiastics  who,  by  sign- 
iniz  it,  had  misled  the  laity. 

Well  may  BuUer  say:  "The  claim  of  the  Popes  to  temporal 
fower  by  Divine  right  has  been  one  of  the  most  calamitous  events 
in  the  history  of  the  Church.  Its  effects  since  the  Reformation 
on  the  Enclish  and  Irish  Catholics  have  been  dreadful."     And 

Xin:  *•  I&w  often  did  our  ancestors  experience  that  ultra-Cath- 
ism  is  one  of  the  worst  enemies  of  Catholicity  I  "     .     .     . 
I  now  pass  to  the  period  which  followed  the  Revolution  of  1688, 
MiMMilllly  with  reference  to  the  bold  assertion  that  before  1870 
Che  Pope*B  infallibility  was  a  doctrine  of  divine  faith. 


The  Revolution  brought  about  by  invasions  of  the  law  and  Con- 
stitution, with  which  the  Church  of  Rome  was  disastrously  asso- 
ciated, necessarily  partook  of  a  somewhat  vindictive  character  as 
toward,  the  Anglo-Roman  body.  Our  penal  provisions  were  a 
mitigated,  but  also  a  debased  copy  of  the  Papal  enactments  a^inst 
heresy.  It  was  not  until  1757,  on  the  appointment  of  thfe  Duke 
of  Bedford  to  the  Lord  Lieutenancy  of  Ireland,  that  the  first  sign 
of  life  was  given.  Indeed,  it  was  only  in  1756  that  a  new  penal 
law  had  been  proposed  in  Ireland.  But  in  the  next  year  the 
Irish  Roman  Catholic  Committee  published  a  declaration  which 
disavowed  the  deposing  and  absolving  power,  with  other  odious 
opinions.  Here  it  was  averred  that  the  Pope  had  "  no  temporal 
or  civil  jurisdiction,"  "directly  or  indirectly,  within  this  reAhn." 
And  it  was  also  averred  that  it  "  is  not  an  article  of  the  Catholic 
faith,  neither  are  we  thereby  obliged  to  believe  or  profess  thai 
the  Pope  is  infallible;  "  in  diametrical  contradiction  to  the  decla- 
ration of  Archbishop  Manning  that  persons  of  his  religion  were 
bound  to  this  belief  before  the  Council  of  1870. 

If  any  thing  had  been  wanting  in  this  Declaration,  it  would 
have  been  abundantly  supplied  by  the  Protestation  of  the  Roman 
Catholics  of  England  in  1788-89.  In  this  very  important  docu- 
ment, which  brought  about  the  passage  of  the  great  English  Re- 
lief Act  of  1791,  besides  a  repetition  of  the  assurances  generally 
which  had  been  theretofore  conveyed,  there  are  contained  state- 
ments of  the  greatest  significance. 

1.  That  the  subscribers  to  it  "  acknowledge  no  infallibility  in 
the  Pope." 

2.  That  their  Church  has  no  power  that  can  directly  or  indi- 
rectly injure  Protestants,  as  all  she  can  do  is  to  refuse  them  her 
sacraments,  which  they  do  not  want. 

3.  That  no  ecclesiastical  power  whatever  can  "directly  or  indi- 
rectly affect  or  interfere  with  the  independence,  sovereignty,  laws, 
constitution,  or  government "  of  the  realm. 

This  protestation  was,  in  the  strictest  sense,  a  representative 
and  binding  document.  It  was  signed  by  241  priests,  including 
all  the  Vicars  Apostolic ;  by  all  the  clergy  and  laity  of  England 
of  any  note;  and  in  1789,  at  a  general  meeting  of  the  English 
Catholics  in  London,  it  was  subscribed  by  every  person  present. 

The  act  of  1791  for  England  was  followed  by  that  of  1793  for 
Ireland.  The  oath  inserted  in  this  act  is  founded  on  the  declara- 
tion of  1757,  and  embodies  a  large  portion  of  it,  including  the 

words  '• 

"  It  is  not  an  article  of  the  Catholic  faith,  neither  am  I  thereby 
required  to  believe  or  profess  that  the  Pope  is  infallible." 

I  refer  to  this  oath,  not  because  I  attach  an  especial  value  to 
that  class  of  security,  but  because  we  now  come  to  a  synodical 
declaration  of  the  Irish  Bishops  which  constitutes,  perhaps,  the 
most  salient  point  of  the  whole  of  this  singular  history. 

On  the  26th  of  February,  1810,  those  Bishops  declared  as  fol- 
lows:— 

"That  the  said  oath,  and  promises,  declarations  and  abjurar 
tions,  and  protestations  therein  contained,  are,  notoriously,  to  the 


MB 


OBBDmiOB  10  THV  KXra. 


OBEDIENCE  TO  THE  POPS. 


2S9 


M 


Boman  Catholic  Charcli  at  large,  become  a  part  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  religion  me  taught  by  us.  the  BishopB,  and  received  and 
maintained  bj  the  Roman  Catholic  Churches  in  Ireland ;  and  as 
■uoti  are  approved  and  sanctioned  by  the  other  Roman  Catholic 

€httrches.  ' 

I      Obedience  to  the  Pope. 

Arehbishop  Manning  has  boldly  ^^rappled  with  my  proposition 
that  the  Third  Chapter  of  the  Vatican  Decrees  had  forged  new 
chains  for  the  Christian  people,  in  regard  to  obedience,  by  givinff 
it»  authority  to  what  was  previously  a  claim  of  the  Popes  onlj, 
and  so  making  it  a  claim  of  the  Church.  He  is  astonished  at 
the  statement,  and  he  offers  what  he  thinks  a  sufficient  confuta- 
tion of  it  in  six  citations. 

The  four  last  of  these  begin  with  Innocent  ITI.  and  end  with 
the  Council  of  Trent.  Innocent  III.  and  Sextus  IV.  simply  claim 
the  regimen  or  government  of  the  Church,  which  no  one  denies 
ihem.  The  Council  of  Florence  speaks  of  plena  poieatas,  and 
the  Council  of  Trent  of  snprema  potestas^  as  belonging  to  the 
Pope.  Neither  of  these  assertions  touch  the  point.  Full  power 
in  the  government  of  a  body  may  still  be  limited  by  law.  No 
other  power  can  be  above  them,  but  it  does  not  follow  that  theyj 
can  command  from  all  persons  an  unconditional  obedience,  unless 
themselves  empowered  by  law  so  to  do.  We  are  familiar  under 
the  British  monarchy,  both  with  the  term  supreme  and  with  its 
liiDitations. 

The  Archbishon,  however,  quotes  a  canon  or  chapter  of  a  Ro- 
man Council  in  863,  which  anathematizes  all  who  despise  the 
Pope's  orders  with  much  breadth  and  amplitude  of  phrase.  If 
taken  without  the  context  it  fully  covers  the  ground  taken  by  the 
Vatican  Council.  It  anathematizes  all  who  contemn  the  decrees 
of  the  Roman  See  in  faith,  discipline,  or  correction  of  manners, 
or  for  the  remedy  or  prevention  of  mischief  Considering  that 
the  four  previous  canons  of  this  Council,  and  the  whole  proceed- 
ings, relate  entirely  to  the  case  of  the  divorce  of  Lothair,  it  might 
perhaps  be  ar^ed  that  the  whole  constitute  only  a  privilegium 
or  law  for  the  individual  case,  and  that  the  anathema  of  the  fifth 
canon  must  be  limited  to  those  who  set  at  naught  the  Pope's  pro- 
ceedings in  that  case.  But  the  point  is  of  small  consequence  to 
my  argument. 

Bnt  then  the  Roman  Council  is  local,  and  adds  no  very  potent 
reinforcement  to  the  sole  authority^  of  the  Pope.  The  question 
then  remains  how  to  secure  for  this  local  and  Papal  injunction 
the  sanction  of  the  Universal  Church,  in  the  Roman  sense  of  the 
word.  Archbishop^  Manning,  perfectly  sensible  of  what  is  re- 
quired of  him,  writes  that  "this  canon  was  recognized  in  the 
Eighth  General  Cooneil,  held  at  Constantinople  in  869."  He  is 
then  more  than  oontented  with  his  array  of  proofs,  and  con- 
fining  himself,  as  I  am  bound  to  mj  he  does  in  all  personal  mat- 
lira  Qiroughout  this  work,  to  the  mildest  language  consistent  with 


the  fbll  expression  of  his  ideas,  he  observes  that  I  am  manifestly 
out  of  my  depth. 

I  know  not  the  exact  theological  value  of  the  term  "  recognized; " 
but  I  conceive  it  to  mean  virtual  adoption.  Such  an  adoption  of 
such  a  claim  by  a  General  Council  appeared  to  me  a  fact  of  tho 
utmost  significance.  I  referred  to  many  historians  of  the  Church ; 
but  1  found  no  notice  of  it  in  those  whom  I  consulted,  including 
Baronius.  From  these  unproductive  references  I  went  onward  to 
the  original  documents. 

The  Eighth  General  Council,  so  called,  comprised  only  those 
l^ishops  of  the  East  who  adhere  to,  and  were  supported  by,  the 
See  of  Rome  and  the  Patriarch  Ignatius  in  the  great  conflict  of  the 
ninth  century.  It  would  not,  therefore,  have  been  surprising  if 
its  canons  hiui  given  some  at  least  equivocal  sanction  to  the  high 
Papal  claims'  But,  on  the  contrary,  they  may  be  read  with  the 
greatest  interest  as  showing,  at  the  time  immediately  bordering 
on  the  publication  of  the  false  Decretals,  how  little  way  those 
claims  had  made  in  the  general  body  of  the  Church.  The  sys- 
tem which  they  describe  is  the  Patriarchal,  not  the  Papal,  sys- 
tem; the  fivefold  distribution  of  the  Christian  Church  under  the 
five  great  Sees  of  the  Elder  and  New  Rome,  Alexandria,  Antioch, 
and  Jerusalem.  Of  these  the  Pope  of  Rome  is  the  first,  but  as 
primus  inter  pares  (Canons  XVII.,  XXI.,  Lat.).  The  causes  of 
clergy  on  appeal  are  to  be  finally  decided  by  the  Patriarch  in  each 
Patriarchate  (Canon  XXVL,  Lat.),  and  it  is  declared  that  any 
General  Council  has  authority  to  deal,  but  should  deal  respect- 
fully, with  controversies  of  or  touching  the  Roman  Church  itself 
(Canon  XXI.  Lat.,  XIII.  Gr.).  This  is  one  of  the  Councils  which 
solemnly  anathematizes  Pope  Honorius  as  a  heretic. 

The  reference  made  by  Archbishop  Manning  is,  as  he  has  had 
tho  goodness  to  inform  me,  to  the  Second  Canon.  The  material 
words  are  these : 

•'  Regarding  the  most  blessed  Pope  Nicholas  as  an  organ  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  likewise  his  most  holy  successor  Adrian,  we 
accordingly  define  and  enact  that  all  which  they  have  set  out  or 
promulgated  synodically  from  time  to  time,  as  well  for  the  defense 
and  well-being  of  the  Church  of  Constantinople,  and  of  its  Chief 
Priest  and  Most  holy  Patriarch  Ignatius,  as  likewise  for  the  ex 
pulsion  and  condemnation  of  Photius,  neophite  and  intruder,  he 
always  observed  and  kept  alike,  entire  and  untouched,  under  (op 
according  to)  the  heads  set  forth  (cum  expositus  capitulis)," 

There  is  not  in  the  canon  any  thing  relating  to  the  i^opes  gener- 
ally, but  only  to  two  particular  Popes;  nor  any  reference  to  what 
they  did  personally,  but  only  to  what  they  did  synodically;  nor  to 
what  they  did  synodically  in  all  matters,  but  only  in  the  contro- 
versy with  Photius  and  the  Eastern  Bishops  adhering  to  him. 
There  is  not  one  word  relating  to  the  Canon  of  863,  or  to  the 
Council  which  passed  it;  which  was  a  Council  having  nothing 
to  do  with  the  Photian  controversy,  but  called  for  the  purpose  oi 
supporting  Pope  Nicholas  I.  in  what  is  commonly  deemed  his 
righteous  policy  with  respect  to  the  important  case  of  the  divorce 
01  Lothair. 


i£ 


240' 


0BEDICXC7B  TO  THB  POFB. 


TMB  DSFOmro  rOWBB  OV  TBM  POFB. 


^: 


So  that  the  demonstration  of  tlie  Archbishop  falls  wholly  to  the 
ground ;  and  down  to  this  time  my  statement  remains  entire  and 
unhurt  The  matter  contained  in  it  will  remain  yery  important 
until  the  Council  or  the  Pope  shall  amend  its  decree  so  as  to  bring 
il  into  oonformity  with  the  views  of  Dr.  Newman,  and  provide  m 
relief  to  the  private  conscience  by  opening  in  the  great  gate  of 
ob«dience  a  little  wieketrdoor  of  exceptions  for  those  who  are 
alnied  to  disobey. 

Had  the  Decrees  of  1870  been  in  force  in  the  sixteenth  and  sev- 
enteenth centuries,  Roman  Catholic  peern  could  not  have  done 
what,  until  the  reign  of  Charles  II. ,  they  did;  could  not  have 
made  their  way  to  the  House  of  Lords  by  taking  the  oath  of  al- 
legiance,  despite  the  Pope's  command.  But  that  is  not  all.  The 
Pope  €x  cathedra  had  bidden  the  Roman  Catholics  of  England  in 
the  eighteenth  century,  and  in  the  sixteenth,  and  from  the  four- 
teenth, to  believe  in  the  deposing:  power  as  an  article  of  faith. 
But  they  rejected  it;  and  the  highest  law  of  their  Church  left 
Hem  free  to  reject  it.  Has  it  not  bound  them  now?  The  Pope 
in  the  sixteenth  century  bade  the  Roman  Catholics  of  England 
iiieist  the  invhsion  of  the  Spanish  Armada.  They  disobeyed  him. 
lie  highest  law  of  their  Church  left  them  free  to  disobey.  Are 
they  free  now?  That  they  will  assert  this  freedom  for  themselves 
I  do  not  question — nay,  I  entirely  believe.  From  every  standing- 
point,  except  that  of  V'aticaniem,  their  title  to  it  is  perfect.  With 
Vaticanism  to  supply  their  premise,  how  are  they  to  conclude? 
Dr.  Newman  says  there  are  exceptions  to  this  precept  of  obedi- 
ence. But  this  IS  just  what  the  Council  has  not  said.  The  Church 
by  the  Council  imposes  yea.  The  private  conscience  reserves  to 
itself  the  title  to  say  no.  I  must  confess  that  in  this  apology  there 
is  to  me  a  strong,  undeniable  siliack  of  Protestantism.  To  recon- 
cile Dr.  Newman's  conclusion  with  the  premises  of  the  Vatican 
will  surely  reouire  all,  if  not  more  than  all,  "  the  vigilance,  acute- 
ness,  and  subtlety  of  the  Sckola  Theologomm" 

The  days  of  such  proceedings,  it  is  stated,  are  gone  by,  and  I 
believe  that,  in  regard  to  our  country,  they  have  passed  away  be- 
yond recall.  But  that  is  not  the  present  question.  The  present 
fiiMtioB  is  whether  the  right  to  perform  such  acts  has  been  effeot- 
vally.diBtivowed. 


fHl  DEPOSING  POWER  OP  THl  POPl. 

It  will  perhaps  have  been  observed  by  others,  as  it  has  been  by 
me,  that  from  me  charges  against  my  account  of  the  Syllabus  are 
notably  abeont  two  of  the  most  important  and  instructive  heads. 
I  accuse  the  Syllabus  of  teaching  tne  rights  of  the  Church  to  use 
inrce,  and  of  maintaining  the  deposing  power. 

When  my  tract  was  published,  I  had  little  idea  of  the  extent 
to  which,  and  (as  to  some  of  them)  the  hardihood  to  which  those 
who  should  have  confuted  my  charges  would  themselves  supply 
evideneo  to  sustain  ihem. 

Bishop  Clifford,  indeed,  sustains  the  deposing  power  on  the 


ground  that  it  was  accorded  to  the  Pope  hj  the  Nations.  It  was 
simply  a  case  like  that  of  the  (Geneva  Arbitrators.  Dr.  Newman 
defends  it,  but  only  npon  conditions.  The  circumstances  must 
be  rare  and  critical.  The  proceeding  must  be  judicial.  It  must 
appeal  to  the  moral  law.  Lastly,  there  must  be  a  united  consent 
of  various  Nations.  In  fine,  Dr.  Newman  accepts  the  deposing 
power  only  under  the  conditions  which,  as  he  thinks,  the  Pope 
nimself  lays  down. 

These  allegations  quiet.my  fears,  but  they  strain  my  faith,  and, 
purporting  to  be  historical,  they  shock  my  judgment.  For  they 
are,  to  speak  plainly,  without  foundation.  The  arbitration  at 
Qenera,  settlea  a  dispute,  which  they  recited  in  formal  terms, 
that  the  two  parties  to  it  had  empowered  and  invited  them  to 
settle.  The  point  of  consent  is  the  only  weighty  one  among  the 
four  conditions  of  Dr.  Newman  and  is  the  sole  point  raised  by 
Bishop  Clifford.  Did,  then,  Paul  III.,  as  arbitrator  in  the  case 
of  Henry  VIII.,  pursue  a  like  procedure?  The  first  words  of  his 
bull  are:  '*  The  condemnation  and  excommunication  of  Henij 
yiH.,  King  of  England  "-^not  an  auspicious  beginning.  There 
is  nothing  at  all  a£)ut  arbitration  or  consent  of  any  b<xly,  but  a 
solemn  and  fierce  recital  of  power  received  from  God,  not  from 
the  nations  or  from  one  nation,  or  from  any  fraction  of  a  nation; 

Sower  "  over  the  nations  and  over  the  kingdoms  to  pluck  up  and 
estroy,  to  build  up  and  to  plant  as  chief  over  all  kin^  of  the 
whole  earth  and  all  peoples  possessing  rule."  Exactly  similar  is 
the  "  arbitration "  of  Pius  V.  between  himself  and  Elizabeth  to 
ths  "arbitration"  of  Paul  III.  between  himself  and  Henry  VIH. 

Archbishop  Manning  indeed,  has  thrown  in  a  statement,  the 
utility  of  which  it  is  bard  to  understand,  that  Queen  Elizabeth 
''was  baptized  a  Catholic."  She  was  baptized  after  Appeals  to 
Rome  had  been  abolished,  and  two  years  after  the  clergy  had 
owned  in  the  King  that  title  of  headship  which  Mary  abofished, 
and  which  never  has  been  revived.  But  Archbishop  Manning 
knows  quite  well  that  the  Papal  claims  of  right  extend  to  all  bap- 
tized persons  whatever,  and  Queen  Victoria  could  have  no  exemp- 
tion unless  it  could  be  shown  that  she  was  unbaptized. 

The  doctrine  of  the  consent  of  Nations  is  a  pure  imagination. 
The  general  truth  of  the  matter  is  that  the  Popes  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  like  some  other  persons  and  professions,  throve  upon  the 
discords  of  their  neighbors.  Other  powers  were  only  some- 
where ;  the  Pope,  in  the  West,  was  everywhere.  Of  the  two  par- 
ties to  a  quarrel,  it  was  worth  the  while  of  each  to  bid  for  the 
assistance  of  the  Pope  against  his  enemy;  and  he  that  bid  the 
highest,  not  merely  in  dry  acknowledgment  of  the  Papal  pre- 
rogatives, but  also  commonly  in  the  solid  tribute  of  Peter  s  pence 
or  patronage,  or  other  tangible  advantages,  most  commonly  got 
the  support  of  the  Pope.  This  is  a  brief  and  rude  outline;  but 
it  is  history,  and  the  other  is  fiction. 

But  does  Dr.  Newman  stand  better  at  this  point?    He  only 

grants  the  deposing  power  in  the  shape  in  which  the  Pope  asu 

it;  and  he  sa^  the  Pope  only  asks  it  on  the  conditions  oi  which 

one  is  "  a  united  consent  of  various  nations."    In  the  spedch  of 

21 


TVM  BBFOfllHO  POWXB  OW  ^fm  FOiB. 

1^9  Pope,  howeven  which  he  cites,  there  ie  nothiDg  oorreipondv 
ing  to  this  aocouni  The  Pope  says  distinctly,  "  of  this  right  the 
Ftmniain  is  (not  the  Infallibilitj.  but^  the  Pontifical  authori^,** 
The  people  or  the  Middle  Ages,  what  did  they  do  ? — ^made  him  an 
arbitrator  or  judge ?  No;  but  recognized  in  him  that  which — 
what?  he  was?  no ;  but—"  he  is,  the  Supreme  Judge  of  Chriaten- 
iam"  The  right  was  not  created,  bill  "  assisted  a«  was  due  to  it| 
bj  the  public  law  and  common  consent  of  the  nations."  If  this 
is  not  enough,  I  will  oomplete  the  demonstration.  An  early  re- 
port of  the  speech  from  the  Boman  newspapers  winds  up  the 
5|»itepent  by  describing  the  deposing  power  as— 

"A  right  which  the  Popes,  inyited  oy  the  eall  of  tiie  nations, 
had  to  exercise  when  the  general  good  demanded  it. 

But  in  the  authorized  and  final  report  given  in  the  "  Collection 
oflhe  Speeches  of  Pius  IX"  this  passage  is  corrected  and  runs 
thus  I 

**A  right  which  the  Popes  exercised  in  virtae  of  tiieir  authority 
wlien  the  general  |:ood  demanded  it." 

Thus  Bishop  Clifford^  and  Dr.  Newman  are  entirely  at  isfiiie 
ifjth  the  Pope  respecting  the  deposing  power.  WiU  thev  not 
have  tQ  reconsider  what  they  are  to  say  and  what  they  are  to  be- 
lieve? That  power,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind,  appears  to  have 
on^  of  the  firmest  j>08sible  Pontifical  foundations  in  the  Bull 
ytiaiit  Sanctum,  which  is  admitted  on  all  hands  to  be  a  declartr 
t|on  €z  cathedra. 

But  it  is  not  to  the  more  moderate  views  of  the  Bishop  and  Dr. 
Newman  that  we  are  to  resort  for  information  on  the  ruling  &8h> 
lopi  of  Boman  doctrine.  Among  the  really  orthodox  defender* 
of  Vaticanism,  who  have  supplied  the  large  majority  of  Reproofs 
and  Beplies,  I  do  not  recollect  to  have  found  one  single  disavowal 
of  the  exposing  power.  Perhaps  the  nearest  approach  to  it  from 
any  writer  of  Siis  school  is  supplied  by  Monsignor  Capel,  who  re- 
nl^rks  that  the  Pope's  office  of  arbiter  is  at  an  end,  or  "  at  least  in 
•It^anoe."  There  are,  indeed,  enough  of  disavowals  wholly 
valiteless.  For  example,  disavowals  of  the  universal  monarchy ; 
by  which  it  appears  to  be  meant  that  the  Popes  never  claimed,  in 
temporals,  sncn  a  monarchical  power  as  is  now  acceded  to  them  in 
spirituals,  namely,  a  power  absorbini^  and  comprehending  every 
otiher  power  whatever.  Or,  again,  disavowals  of  the  direcia  po- 
tmtas.  For  one,  I  attach  not  a  feather's  weight  to  the  distinction 
bnlween  the  direct  power  and  the  indirect,  Speakinjg  in  his  own 
person.  Archbishop  Manning  eschews  the  gross  assertion  to  which, 
in  another  work,  ne  has  lent  a  sanction,  and  seems  to  think  he 
has  mended  the  position  when  he  tells  us  that  the  Church — that 
is  to  say,  the.  Pope — "  has  a  supreme  judicial  office,  in  respect  to 
the  moTal  law,  over  all  Nations,  and  over  all  persons,  both  gov- 
ernors iind  governed."  As  long  as  they  do  right  it  is  directive 
and  pi«ceptive',  when  they  do  wrong,  the  black  cap  of  the  Jud^ 
it  put  on,  ratione  peceaU,  "  by  reason  of  sin."  That  is  to  say,  m 
plain  words,  the  right  and  the  wrong  in  the  conduct  of  States  and 
of  indlfidnab  is  now,  aa  it  alvrays  has  been,  a  matter  for  the  judi- 


MATirBB  IHD  OfUfDITlOir  f»  PAPAL  DTFALUBILITT. 


243 


eial  Mgnizanoe  of  the  Choroh;  and  the  entire  judicial  power  of 
the  Church  is  summed  up  in  the  Pope : 

"  If  Christian  Princes  and  their  laws  deviate  from  the  law  of 
€k>d,  the  Church  has  authority  from  God  to  judge  of  that  devia-^ 
tion,  and  by  all  its  powers  to  enforce  the  correction  of  that  de- 
parture from  justice." 

I  must  accord  to  the  Archbishop  the  praise  of  manliness.  If 
we  are  henceforward  in  any  doubt  as  to  nis  opinions,  it  is  by  our 
own  fault.  I  sorrowfully  believe,  moreover,  that  he  does  no  more 
than  express  the  general  opinion  of  the  teachers  who  form  the 
ruling  body  in  his  Church  at  large,  and  of  the  present  Anglo- 
Komish  clergy  almost  without  exception.  In  the  episcopal  man- 
ifesto of  Bishop  Ullathorne  I  see  nothing  to  qualify  the  doctrine. 
In  the  Pastoral  Letter  of  Bishop  Vaughan  the  comfort  we  obtain 
is  this:  "It  will  never,  as  we  believe,  be  exercised  again;"  and 
**  it  is  a  Question  purely  speculative.  It  is  no  matter  of  Catholic 
faith,  and  is  properly  relegated  to  the  schools."  Bishop  Vaughan 
does  not  appear  to  bear  in  mind  that  this  is  exactly  what  we 
were  told,  not  by  his  predecessors  of  1789,  who  denied  Infallibi^ 
ity  outright;  not  by  the  Synod  of  1810,  who  affirmed  it  to  be  im- 
possible that  Infallibility  ever  could  become  an  article  of  faith ; 
but  even  in  the  "bated  breath"  of  later  times  with  respect  to 
Infallibility  itself,  which,  a  little  while  after,  was  called  back  from 
the  schools  and  the  speculative  region,  and  uplifted  into  the  list 
of  the  Christian  credenda ;  and  of  which  we  are  now  told  that  it 
has  been  believed  always  and  by  all,  only  its  boundaries  have 
been  a  little  better  marked. 

In  the  train  of   the  Bishops  (I  except  Bishop  Cliffi>rd)  come 

Sriests,  monks,  nay,  laymen ;  Vaticanism  in  all  its  ranks  and  or- 
ers.  And  among  these  champions  not  one  adopts  the  lauguage 
even  of  Bishop  iSayle,  much  less  of  1810,  much  less  of  17o9. 
The  "Monk  of  St.  Augustine's"  is  not  ashamed  to  say  that 
Bishop  Doyle,  who  was  put  forward  in  his  day  as  the  champion 
and  representative  man  of  the  body,  "  held  opinions  openly  at 
variance  with  those  of  the  great  mass." 


Nature  and  Coitoition  of  Papal  Infallibility. 

We  are  told  it  would  be  an  entire  mistake  to  confound  thid 
Infallibility  of  the  Pope,  in  the  province  assigned  to  it,  witli 
absolutism. 

"  The  Pope  is  bound  by  the  m6ral  and  divine  law,  by  the  com- 
mandments of  God,  by  the  rules  of  the  Gospel,  and  by  every 
definition  in  faith  and  morals  that  the  Church  has  ever  made. 
No  man  is  more  bound  by  law  than  the  Pope;  a  fact  plainly 
known  to  himself  and  to  every  bishop  and  priest  in  Christen- 
dom."— (Bishop  Vaughan,  Pastoral  Letter.) 

Every  definition  in  faith  and  morals  I  These  are  written  defi- 
nitions. What  are  they  but  another  Scripture?  What  right  of 
interpreting  this  other  scripture  is  granted  to  the  Church  at  lar^a 
more  than  of  the  real  and  greater  Scripture  ?-    Here  is  surely  m 


-  4m^^ 


MAnrna  um  oommimmi  of  »ai»ai.  wiallibilht. 


Hi  forfection  tiM  petition  for  bread  uiiwefed  by  tbe  gift  of  • 

BiihoB  Yaughsii  does  net  Tenture  to  Mseii  that  the  Pope  is 
bound  bj  the  canon  law«-the  written  law  of  the  Church  of 
Bono..  The  abolition  of  the  French  Sees  under  the  Concordat 
witli  Naiwleon,  and  the  deposition  of  the  legitimate  Biahons  even 
if  it  were  the  only  instanoe,  bai  setded  that  question  forever. 
Over  the  written  law  of  his IChnroh  the  pleasure  of  the  Pope  is 
supreme.  And  this  justifios,  for  every  practical  purpose,  the  as- 
lertfen  «hatkwii#  mipff  etists  in  that  Church,  in  the  sai^e  very 
real  tense  as  we  should  say  there  was  no  kw  in  England,  m  the 
feign  of  James  the  Second,  while  it  was  subject  to  a  dispensing 

Sjwer.  There  exists  no  law  wherever  a  living  ruler,  an  execu- 
ve  he«i,  claims  and  exercises,  and  is  allowed  to  possess  a  power 
annulling  or  a  power  of  disnensing  with  the  law.  If  Bishop 
Yanghan  does  not  know  this,  l  am  sorry  to  say  that  he  does  not 
know  the  irsi  lesson  that  every  English  citizen  should  learn;  he 
hm  yet  to  pass  through  the  lispings  of  civil  childhood.  This  ex- 
•mption  ofSie  individual,  be  he  who  he  may,  from  the  restraints 
of  &ie  law  is  the  very  thing  that  in  England  we  term  absolutism. 
By  absolutism  we  mean  the  superiority  of  a  personal  will  to  law, 
fbr  the  purpose  of  putting  aside  or  changing  law.    Now,  that 

Smer  is  precisely  what  the  Pope  possesses.  First,  because  he  k 
fUlible  in  faith  and  morals  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedra,  and  be 
himself  is  the  final  judge  which  of  his  utterances  shall  be  utter^ 
taoes  ex  cathedra.  He  has  onlv  to  use  the  words,  "  I,  ex  eaih^ 
ifru,  declare ;  "  or  the  words,  "  f,  in  the  discharge  of  the  office  of 
■iitor  and  teacher  of  all  Christiana,  by  virtue  of  my  supreme 
SpMtolic  authority,  define  as  a  doctrine  regarding  faith  or  mor- 
als, to  be  held  by  the  Universal  Church,"  and  all  words  that  may 
illlow,  be  they  what  they  may,  must  now  and  hereafter  be  as 
absolutely  accepted  by  every  Human  Catholic  who  takes  the  Vatr 
ican  fbr  his  teacher,  with  what  in  their  theological  language  thev 
eall  a  divine  faith,  as  must  any  article  of  the  AposUes  Creed- 
And  what  words  they  are  to  be  that  may  follow,  the  Pope  by  his 
mni  will  and  motion  k  tbe  sole  judge. 


MISCELLANEOUS. 


[rftOM  TMI  OHBUTIAM  8TAMDAU>.} 

LORD  CAMOYS'  LETTER. 


Aa  our  readers  will  be  anxious  to  know  of  every  new  develop- 
ment in  the  Gladstone-Manning  controversy,  we  copy  the  follow- 
ing telegram : 

"liONDON,  Nov.  30,  5.30  A.  M. — ^A  circular  letter  from   Arch 
bkhop  Mannthg  was  read  in  all  the  Catholic  Churches  of  thk 
diocese  yesterday,  declaring  that  all  persons  who  do  not  accept 
the  dogma  of  Papal  Infallibility  cease  to  be  Catholics." 

This,  in  view  of  what  Gladstone  has  proved  to  be  involved  in  the 
doetrine  of  the  Pope's  Infallibility,  and  what  has  been  frankly 
admitted  bv  eminent  Roman  Catholics  to  be  true,  must  be  re- 
carded  88  almost  a  defiance  on  the  part  of  Archbishop  Manning. 
It  is,  at  least,  evidence  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  means 
to  draw  the  lines  sharply  and  make  a  square  issue.  It  is  a  bold 
measure,  especially  in  view  of  the  known  sentiments  of  leadine 
Boman  Catholics  in  England.  We  published  last  week  the  frank 
admission  of  Lord  Acton  in  his  letter  to  Gladstone.  We  give  now 
another  expression  of  English  Roman  Catholic  sentiment,  from 
Lord  Cftmoys — a  nobleman  who  stands  high  in  his  church,  and  is 
popular  with  all  classes  in  England : 

[rftOM  THK  LONOOM  TIMES,  KOr.  14.] 

We  have  been  requested  by  Lord  Camoys  to  publish  the  fol< 
lowing  letter: 

"  Henlby-on-Thamb8,  Nov.  13,  1874. 

"  Dear  Mr.  Gladstone  :  In  your  *  Expostulation '  you  have  ap- 
pealed to  those  English  Roman  Catholics  who  concur  in  the  views 
you  have  therein  expressed.  As  I  am  one  of  those  who  so  con- 
cur, I  am  bound  to  say  so.  No  one  is  more  entitled  than  your- 
self to  an  expression  of  confidence  from  those  who  have  been 
benefited  by  the  great  principles  of  civil  and  religous  liberty  by 
which  you  have  been  invariably  guided.  I  concur  in  the  proposi- 
tion you  have  stated,  though  I  regret  in  reference  to  the  reign  of 
<^ueeo  Mary,  vou  should  have  considered  it  necessary  to  use  the 
term  •  bloody.  It  is  unnecessary  to  argue  upon  the  accuracy  of 
the  expression.  That  word  has  always  been  and  is  offensive  to 
the  Rcunan  Catholics,  and  was  not  needed  to  support  your  assert 

(245) 


LOBD  OUfOTS 


I  WiiW  It  to  be  piffiotlj  true,  Bince  that  reign  it  wm  not 

WMsible  f<ir  tlie  party  to  whom  you  allude, — I  presume  the  Kit- 
oaliats— iumI,  jou  might  ha¥e  added,  for  the  Roman  Catholics,  and 
I  add  Ibr  both  oombmed,  though  they  might  tend  to  overthrow 
the  Sstabliehed  Church,  jet  could  never  make  thii  a  Roman 
OiHiolio  country.  Lord  Acton  and  yourself  have  drawn  atten- 
tton,  and  quite  appropriately,  to  the  language  held  by  the  Roman 
ChUhoiio  clergy  and  hiity  previoua  to  emaDcipation,  when  the  dis- 
tinolion  between  the  civil  and  spiritual  duties  of  Catholics  was 
dearly  defined,  and  Infallibility  emphatically  denied.  Had  any 
Catholic  of  importance  then  said,  '  1  am  a  Catholic  first  and  an 
IHglbhman  after/  and  that  without  the  slightest  reservation, 
and,  hid  that  expression  been  defended  by  a  Catholic  Archbishop 
®f  thai  day  as  it  has  been  defended  by  the  Archbishop  of  Westr 
miaater,  1  very  much  doubt  if  Catholic  emancipation  would  have 
been  granted.  In  noticing  your  '  Expostulation,'  the  Archbishop 
of  Westminster,  in  his  published  letter,  said  that  there  is  no 
change  in  the  obligations  of  the  Roman  Catholics  to  the  eivU 

K>wer  in  consequence  of  the  publication  of  the  Vatican  Decreea. 
ow  is  this  so?  It  is  not  likely  the  present  Pope  will  adopt 
against  Queen  Victoria,  the  course  pursued  by  the  then  Pope 
againat  (£ieen  Blisabeth,  but  there  is  no  telling  what  edict  midit 
be  iianed  by  the  author  of  the  Syllabus.  Assuming  an  edict 
HUM  aow  iMued,  tending  to  weaken  or  destroy  allegiance,  what  a 
diUnnl  poeition  a  Roman  Catholic  would  be  in  now  from  what 
he  would  have  been  in  then.  In&llibility  was  not  then  a  matter 
of  compulsory  belief,  and  he  would  have  been  at  liberty  to  refute 
oompiianoe  with  such  an  edict ;  but  what  would  be  the  effect  of 
his  belief  in  the  personal  infallibility  ?  He  must  either  withhold 
hia  allegiance  on  the  one  hand,  or  risk  his  salvation  on  the  other; 
and  is  not  this  a  new  obligation  ?  To  be  compelled  to  believe 
under  severe  penalties  now,  what  we  were  at  liberty  to  disbelieve 
then  with  impunity,  is  surely  a  new  obligation.  As  an  inde- 
pendent English  Roman  Catholic,  I  consider  it  my  duty  to  make 
this  response  to  your  appeal.  Much  may  be  said  of  the  serious 
dllficiilties  that  many  members  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
Utroughout  the  world  will  be  placed  in,  by  being  compelled  to 
believe  in  the  Vatican  Decrees.  For  myself,  I  will  say  that  hit- 
tory,  common  sense,  and  my  early  instruction,  forbid  me  to  ac- 
cept the  astounding  and  novel  (novel  at  least,  in  ite  present 
promol^on)  doctrine  of  the  personal  infallibility  of  the  Pope, 
thouehlimited,  as  asserted,  to  the  krge  domain  of  faith  and 
monOs.  I  remain  yours,  faithfully, 

"Camoys." 
All  such  men  are  ^iven  to  understand  that  they  must  eat  their 
words  and  belie  their  convictions,  or  cease  to  be  regarded  as 
Oatholict.  This  is  frank,  definite,  unmistakable— indicating  a 
settled  pnrpose  on  the  part  of  the  Church  to  stand  or  fall  with 
thedoetrine  of  the  Pope's  Infallibility,  accepting  all  ite  logical 
■od  Geological  consequences. 

Those  English  Catholics  whom  we  mention  elsewhere  as  having 
gone  or  about  to  g9  to  Rome,  to  persuade  the  Pope  not  to  inabt 


WKD  OAMOTS'  LETTER. 


241 


on  applying  the  doctrine  of  Infallibility  in  such  a  way  as  to  in- 
terfere with  their  political  relations  in  England,  will  find  cold 
comfort,  according  to  the  following  statement : 

"  This  morning  the  Pope,  who  has  recovered  from  his  indispo 
sition,  after  receiving  the  Bishop  of  Bucharest,  admitted  several 
Bnglish  Catholics  to  an  audience.     In  addressing  them,  he  said : 

'•  A  former  Minister  of  your  country,  whom  I  had  believed 
rather  moderate,  and  who,  to  say  the  truth,  had  never  while  in 
office  manifested  arrogance  or  violence  toward  the  Catholic 
Church,  intoxicated  by  the  proceedings  of  another  Minister  in 
another  State,  has  suddenly  come  forward,  like  a  viper,  assailing 
this  bark  of  St.  Peter.  I  have  not  read  the  book,  and  I  have  no 
creat  desire  to  read  blasphemies,  but  from  what  I  understand,  the 
Minister  whom  they  call  Liberal,  flatters  the  Catholics  of  that 
nation,  and  leads  them  to  believe  that  I  wish  them  to  become 
disloyal  to  their  sovereign  and  the  laws  of  their  country. 
Puzzled  at  beholding  the  vast  progress  made  by  that  great  na- 
tion in  the  path  of  the  true  faith,  the  fallen  Minister  hoped  to 
arrest  the  luminous  triumph  of  the  Church  by  interpreting  after 
his  own  fashion,  the  will  of  this  poor  Vicar  of  Christ.  A  great 
King  (Charlemagne)  said  that  even  should  the  Church  impose 
heavy  burdens  on  the  conscience  of  the  population,  the  Catholics 
should  bear  them  from  their  interest  in  the  communion  of  the 
Church ;  but  our  dogmas,  far  from  being  burdens,  are  light. 
Those  who  will  walk  astray  are  not  Catholics ;  they  are  worse 
than  infidels  and  Protestants,  because,  calling  themselves  Cath- 
olics, they  daily  rebel  against  God  and  the  laws  of  the  Church." 

This  fierce  denunciation  of  Gladstone  without  one  word  of  de- 
nial of  the  truth  of  Gladstone's  charges,  or  the  slightest  attempt 
to  soften  the  doctrine  of  papal  supremacy  and  Infallibility,  is 
significant  as  an  illustration  of  the  spirit  that  reigns  at  the  Vat- 
ican, and  the  policy  of  the  Pope  to  push  his  claims  to  the  utmost. 

That  Gladstone  is  not  a  victim  of  idle  fears  in  asserting  that 
even  England,  in  spite  of  all  previous  asseverations  of  Roman 
Catholic  ecclesiastics,  is  placed  in  a  new  and  somewhat  danger- 
ous position,  by  the  latest  phases  of  Romanism,  he  has  abund- 
antly  demonstrated;  and,  as  we  have  seen,  eminent  Catholic 
noblemen  admit  the  truth  and  force  of  his  statements  and  reason- 
ings. In  this  country,  while  we  may  flatter  ourselves  that  we 
have  no  concern  with  this  strife  between  Church  and  Stete,  it  is 
well  to  watch  all  the  bearings  of  this  controversy — since  it  may 
prove  that  even  here,  a  strife  may  yet  be  provoked  of  exceeding 
oittemess.  The  open  and  fierce  assaults  on  our  public  school 
system,  the  unscrupulous  efforts  to  secure  State  patronage  for  ec- 
jlesiastical  institutions,  and  the  bold  avowal  of  the  most  offensive 
teachings  of  the  famous  and  infamous  Syllabus,  all  show  the 
anti-republican  ncture  of  a  pcxer  which  is  growing  into  im- 
mense proportions  in  our  land. 


m 


1 


i 


LOIB  OAMOTS'  LBTTBB. 

tiiMi.  I  Miove  it  to  be  perfectly  fcnie.  sinee  that  reiffn  it  mm  not 
Fg^orthaparty  to  ^^  allude,^!  presSie  ZrSh 

"f^^ryi^J^  mi^hfc  have  added,  for  the  Romln  Catholics,  and 
iTlWhl^hL^^^^^  though  thej  might  tend  to  overthrow 
C^oho  oountfj.     Lord  Acton  and  yourself  have  drawn  atten- 


Ottolieof  imDortence  then  said,  'f  am  a  Catholic  first  and  d 

^hi?^  ^  e«w«e.ion  b<»en  defended  bv  a  dtholio  Archbishop 
^i^,/  "  "  "»«  »r°.^«f«'"'«'  by  tfie  Archbishop  of  Weav 
»unrtw;rje,y  much  doubt  if  Catholic  emancipation  would  h^i 

rfwSSSi^i.,  i  "»'?<'""« ^J;?";E?PO»talation,'  the  ArohbUhop 
S^J:«  ?^^''  i?.  '^  published  letter,  said  that  there  is  no 
etange  in  the  obligations  of  the  Roman  Catholica  to  the  ci°U 

Krk°thk";TT°^  the  publication  of  the  Vatican  Dec^ 
J*«r  »  this  so?    It  11  not  hkely  the  present  Pope  wiU  adopt 
■gatoat  Queen  Victoria,  the  course  pursued  by  the  then  Poi 

Ef!L".L2"rf  ""^u'^'  •"•,'  "">">  "  «>  *«'"»?  what  edict  n^^ 
be  issued  by  the  au^or  of  the  Syllabus.   'Issumine  an  ^ct 

iSh.  .T  T*^  *'5'*'°«  *»  weaken  or  destroyallegiaioe,  what" 
«b«»rtljM.honaRomM  Catholic  would  bo'in  nSTfrom  Wh^ 
o?.!^i      "  ^°;"  '^*f     InfcUibility  was  not  then  a  mattur 

J>^^Z^:±'^'^  "If-  r"u"  •"!•  b^"  «^  liberty  to  »faS 
t^u&^^  T.r' '""''  ""  '^'<=* ;  but  what  would  be  the  efleet  of 
u!  X!f.'„°J^  T^"'^  infeUibility  ?    He  must  eidj  wUhhoM 

Mmjs  not  this  a  new  obligation  ?    To  be  compelled  to  beliere 

»!^.7;  B  '"P""^'  »  »?^y  »  new  obligation.    As  an  inde- 

SSt^^^f^  ^"^  *^*»  *  "on'W"  it  my  duty  to  Zkt 
ttaj  nmonse  to  your  appeal  Jlneh  may  be  said  of  the  serimi. 
jMeotoe.  that  many  members  of  the  RomaT  CaSoUc  X^ 
*rp«W«Mmt  the  iforldf  will  be  placed  in  by  TeinecomVlM 
bdim  b,  the  Vatican  DecreesTXr  mvseff.  I  w^l  ^fffhi^ 
to^  oommon  ,en«,.  and  my  early  instruction   forborne  t^ 

Crft^Si^"*"'  "/."•«  P*"°"»'  infellibiUty  of  the'^Pop" 
tho^Tunited,  as  asserted,  to  the  laige  domain  of  &ith  uid 

"""^  I  remain  yours,  faithfully, 

worfLllS  ne'IS.^^"  to  understand  that  they  m'us^1^"tiii« 
SSwJsif    SE,-     ^'^  con^ctions,   or  cease  to  be  regarded  •■ 

SaSiSiK  .h.  P  '^T°','?,?v9.''°"*  to  "^"^  <»•  &»  with 
«S  A^J^^  I  *  ^"P* '  InfallibiUty,  accepting  all  iu  logical 
■aatheological  consequences.  *^ 

^.nT^f.?!^.'!''  ^tbo'ie'whom  we  mention  elsewhere  as  hayimr 
gone  or  about  to  gp  to  Borne,  to  persuade  the  Pope  not  to  in^ 


U>RD  OAMDTS'  LBTTEB. 


341 


on  applyiiuc  the  doctrine  of  Infallibilitr  in  such  a  wav  a.  r«  <. 
terfere  with  their  political  relations  S  En|hnd,  wiff  tod  coS 
oomfort,  according  to  the  following  statemeft: 

1  His  morning  the  Pope,  who  has  recovered  from  his  indisno 
Snrilih  r^^hT'TK  *be  Bishop  of  Bucharest,  admit^  sevIS 
■ft™.,  ^  *^r  "»/''"""'•  ^^  ""^dressing  them,  he  said : 
rather  Zr~»'"!.''\°'^?''"'"*'°'i°'^'  "bom^l  had  believed 
^ce  m^ff^^^""*  "'"'•  *°  "'y  '.''?  *""■.  had  never  while  in 
rhnLh  ?^.„  '^  /T^J""  '"■  ^'"'^''''^  toward  the  Catholic 
^noZer'StaU  £!;^  5-5*,*  P^'^^di^eo  "f  another  Minister  in 
th^S  h!Jl  nfllV^  suddenly  come  forward,  like  a  viper,  assailing 

erl^eSire  S^r^H^hi  \'"^?  "1*7"/  "">  book,  and  I  have  nf 
great  desire  to  rend  blasphemies,  but  from  what  J  understand  the 
Minister  whom  they  calll  Liberal,  flatters  the  CatholS^of 'that 
S^w;]"!^  'r^  *'■*"'  *?  ^^'""^^  *batl  wish  them  t^Wome 
PuITJ  »^l>f^*"M-  ""^^""6"  «'«'  tbe  laws  of  their  couX 
tio^  ^the  ^*h  f".^  *•";  """i  K°^i^'  ■P'"'*'  by  that  great  nl 
.i^.f  .K.  I  P^*  "'^  .  ^  *™?  '^"b.  the  fiillen  Itfinister  Lped  to 
arrest  the  luminous  triumph  of  the  Church  by  interoretin?  .ftli 

KlTTctX"""'  'b*  ^i"  of  this  poor  VicarTf  ChriTt  I'^^J 
f.„£V  5  ''""S"?)  «»"i  that  even  should  the  Church  im^se 
heavy  burdens  on  the  conscience  of  the  population,  tSe  Cathf H« 
fcch^T  ?""°  *!;""  'beir  interest  in'^  L  communion  of  hi 
^nll  \^''\i"",?°^'"'-  *^*'  from  being  burdens,  are  liAt 
Those  who  will  walk  astray  are  not  Catholics;  they  are  wonio 
«han  infidels  and  Protestants,  because,  calling  themselves  cX 
olics  they  daily  rebel  against  God  and  the  laws  of  the  Oiur  "h  " 
nirio?  ?hTt™thTf  nf r.  "^  P'"^**""*  "''bout  one  woJd  of  d.v 
to  .ofte^t^S^^?-*^'™^?*""* '.*=''"?"'•  "'  *be  slightest  attempt 
to  soften  the  doctrine  of  papal  supremacy  and  Infallibility  i« 
significant  as  an  illustration  of  the  spirit  aiWt  reigns  at  the  Vat 
■  'That''r.'^'r"'=^  °'  f'  ^"P?  *°  P"«b  bis  claimft^  fte  u  Jst 

STthoK^^fj  .-f  *-P'*?  °^,  *".  P.™"""'  "Meveratione  of  fiom,m 

™.^^,Uin^  I  .K**S'!  Pi~=?^  '"  »  "«"  '"d  somewhat  dange" 
ous  position,  by  the  latest  phases  of  Romanism    he  ha«  ahnnT 

^U^rT*^!^:""^-  hr  b'-o  seen,  eiinent   CaS 

i°n«  In  tlfif  i' *^^  '""'V,"'^  *^""'  »'■  bi'  statements  and  reason- 
ings.   In  this  country,  while  we  may  flatter  ourselves  that  w. 

have  no  concern  with  this  strife  between  Church  and  St^te  it  ^ 
Zww'"''  "i*^"  bearings  of  this  controversy-lliince  it  may 
S^™^«  "  tL*"*"'  "  '''i^l  ""y  y«'  be  provokid  of  exceed^n^ 
™te™  ^^  "P*?  »°ifi«'-<'«  «^«"'lt8  on  our  public  school 

ystem  the  unscrupulous  efforts  to  secure  State  patronage  for  ec^ 
Jlesiastical  institutfons.  and  the  bold  avowal  of  t£e  mosToffeMive 
iSSr3,I?i^  ftjfons  and  infamous  Syllabus,  J?  show  Z 
anti-repubhcan  natjirj>..of  a  newer  .whioh  -is  icrJwine  into  im- 
mense  proportions  in  ourlani   .•;...-.  ".if^wing  into  im- 


»    •    •      *   • 


•  a 


•  *  . 

s  ..  • 


.' .   , 


% 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


■ .  1 . 1 . . .  1 . 


025990292 


[J 


936 
956 


C  iS'4 


C  (5*4- 


ftQ  24 


